Jump to content
Important Info
  • Register now to gain full access!
  • Full Info about Phoenix: HERE
  • Full Info about Inception: HERE
  • OSGM Competition: HERE
  • Big Guide for Newbies: HERE
  • Welcome to OldSquad Community

    Looking to have fun on a Professional Environment?
    Then you are in the best place!
    Join our MU Online Servers and feel the difference.

    SEASON 6 EP 3 - HARD ECONOMY SYSTEM

    - Progressive Gameplay.
    - Dynamic Low EXP.
    - Boosted EXP for Newbies!

    OUTSTANDING QUALITY & SUPPORT

    - Highly configured details in a Smart & Professional way.
    - 15/24 Support on Forum & Facebook.
    - Satisfaction Guaranteed!

    HIGH STABILITY & LONG TERM EDITIONS

    - Dedicated Project without monthly restarts.
    - 95% UP-TIME with announced Maintenances.
    - Weekly Updates & Improvements.

    REAL PLAY2WIN!

    - No WebShop / CashShop / VipServer.
    - Credits can be farmed easily INGAME.
    - 100% Balanced Services.

    Introducing CS V3 - The next level


    ADMIN
     Share

    Recommended Posts


    • Group:  Administrators
    • Content Count:  3,892
    • Reputation:   2,187
    • Joined:  12/30/2015
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    Hello,

    While our unique CS V2 fixed the most important CS problem - being decided in last minutes, on the default CS system - we decided that it is time to step up our most important Event and make it even more interesting, balanced as well, as less predictable as possible and with a lot of new possible strategies.

    This is one of the major reworks that will be found on our next Phoenix project, but it should be ready & available on Inception as well starting from next CS (27 February).

    We're doing our best to test everything by ourselves (me & Gion), but we will need actual, real-game tests in order to tweak it up and fix any possible bugs.

    Note: We're waiting feedback & open discussions of anything that you can find in our CS V3, but the more accurate feedback should be waited after playing it.
     

    CS System V3

    Guilds, Alliances, Handicap & Requirements

    • [UPDATED] Guild System:
      • Maximum of 30 players in a Guild (static).
      • Now Alliance members can join the CS as well.
      • At CS you can only have 40 (online) players per alliance (so 40/60 from total slots in an alliance).
        • You must have at least 10 players from the main guild online at CS in order to play the CS.
      • There are 2 modes of the limit at CS, that each alliance GM can decide:
        • Free Mode - it is the default mode - this means that any 40 players can be online on CS server anytime, during CS, without restrictions.
          • How does it work? When the 40th player enters the Valley, any extra player (41th, for example) will be moved to Crywolf, when trying to enter the Valley.
          • When there are 39 players in Valley, an empty slot is once again free for another extra player, and so on.
          • Note: The priority for staying in Valley when there are more than 40 players is based on the order of /rebuilds.
          • Example: ADMIN is 1st that did rebuild, Gion is 2nd that did rebuild, Marcel is 3rd that did rebuild. If there are < 40 players on Valley, all 3 can stay in Valley. If there are 40 players already in Valley and ADMIN is not but Marcel is, if ADMIN joins Valley then Marcel is being kicked from Valley and ADMIN can stay.
        • Limited Mode - this means that there's a list controlled by alliance GM with the players who do not have access to CS (any player other than the players from this list can join the CS). GM can add/remove players to/from the list anytime before 15 minutes from start & during CS.
          • Note: GM can use the command /blacklist PlayerName in order to blacklist a player from the CS.
          • Note2: GM can use the command /delblacklist PlayerName in order to remove a player from blacklist.
          • Note3: Few seconds after blacklisting a player, if he is online in valley he will be moved to crywolf and prevented from joining Valley.
    • [UPDATED] Handicap now has only 3 stages:
      • Easy - 2nd CS after winning the CS:
        • -2500 Points.
      • Medium - 3rd CS after winning 2 CS in a row:
        • -6000 Points.
      • Hard - 4th CS after winning 3 CS in a row and onwards:
        • -10000 Points.
      • Note: With these changes we aim to make it way harder for Alliances to win CS multiple times in a row. Until now Handicap wasn't that harsh and didn't help too much outside of the last Handicap stage (after 5 Sieges in a row).
    • [UPDATED] Repairing & upgrading CS objects (gates, statues) can grant you up to 20% points from the Handicap.
    • [UPDATED] After winning a Castle Siege, the players that were part of the CS (used /rebuild) and part of the winning alliance can only join the next CS with their winning Alliance.
      • Example: ADMIN is part of OldSquad, went to CS last CS with his guild and was part of CS. OldSquad won the CS. ADMIN can only join next week's CS with OldSquad guild.
      • Example2: OldSquad is in alliance with ADMINS, ADMIN is part of OldSquad and Gion is part of ADMINS. OldSquad alliance wins the CS. Next week both ADMIN & Gion can join CS only with OldSquad alliance (as main alliance guild).
      • Note: This change is made to avoid cases of winning Guilds remaking their guild / join another guild for CS just to get rid of Handicaps.
    • [UPDATED] Now you can play the CS only with the guild/alliance that you started with when you did /rebuild. You can't join other guilds/alliances during CS.
    • [UPDATED] Requirements in order for an alliance to be able to register Signs of Lord:
      • Have at least 20 members in main guild.
      • Have the Average Reset of main guild >= 65% of TOP1 Player reset (rounded down).
        • Example: If TOP1 Player has 6 Resets, the minimum Average Reset of the Main Guild must be 3.
        • Exception: This check is only available when the TOP1 has at least 6 resets (under 6 resets the check is not active).
    • [UPDATED] Requirements in order for an alliance to be able to stay in Valley before & during CS:
      • Be selected as CS participant (after Signs period).
      • Have at least 20 members in main guild.
      • Have the Average Reset of main guild >= 65% of TOP1 Player reset (rounded down).
        • Example: If TOP1 Player has 6 Resets, the minimum Average Reset of the Main Guild must be 3.
        • Exception: This check is only available when the TOP1 has at least 6 resets (under 6 resets the check is not active).
      • Have at least 10 players from main guild online in either Crywolf or Valley.
      • Have /rebuild already made.
      • Note: The check is happening every minute.

    Note:

    During years we've tried all the possible methods of guild systems especially for CS. Some performed better than others, but none of them were totally satisfying.
    We're once again trying something new, compared to what we had so far.
    With this current system we aim to give back identities to the allied guilds, encouraging lower-tier guilds to ally each-other and to participate at CS without having to be part of the main guild, while keeping the CS players numbers in a balanced state.

    New CS Features

    • [ADDED] CS Statues
      • There are now 2 statues, one is on the East side outside the room (104x 192y) and one is on the West side outside of the room (77x 145y).
      • These Statues are now extra mini-objectives during CS.
      • They can be controlled by one alliance at a time.
      • In order to control a Statue your alliance must have AT LEAST 2 players in its 5x5 range (the statue zones are marked with 4 guards).
      • In order to control a Statue your alliance must have the highest number of players (compared to rest of the alliances) in its 5x5 range.
      • Examples:
        • If OldSquad does have 1 player in the 5x5 range of a Statue, and no other Alliance does have any player in the range, then the Statue is in a neutral state (not controlled).
        • If OldSquad does have 2 players in the 5x5 range of a Statue, and no other Alliance does, then the Statue is controlled by OldSquad.
        • If OldSquad does have 2 players in the 5x5 range of a Statue, and other Alliance does have 1 player in the range, then the Statue is controlled by OldSquad.
        • If OldSquad does have 2 players in the 5x5 range of a Statue, and other Alliance does have 2 players in the range, then Statue is controlled by the Alliance that already controlled it.
        • If OldSquad does have 2 players in the 5x5 range of a Statue, and other Alliance does have 3 players in the range, then Statue is controlled by the other Alliance.
      • East Statue advantage:
        • While holding the East Statue, your alliance will gain +100% (in the first CS hour) / +50% (in the second CS hour) Defense points per second, until the alliance lose the control of the Statue.
      • West Statue advantage:
        • While holding the West Statue, your alliance will gain +50% (while a Kill Points modifier is still active) / +100% (while a Kill Points modifier is not active) Kill Points based on the final number of points a killer would normally get.
      • If your alliance holds both statues then the following buff will be up for your alliance until you lose at least 1 Statue:
        • GM will gain damage immunity, preventing him from being damaged, while the buff is active.
        • Note: The immunity buff for GM when holding both statues does make him immune from being moved as well.
    • [ADDED] Gigas Golem
      • Every 12 minutes after it is killed or it is despawned (starting at 17:30) a Gigas Golem will spawn in the Valley, before the Bridge, at fixed coordinates.
      • Gigas Golem has 3 minutes duration, then it is auto despawned.
      • The Gigas Golem is another mini-objective, but a timed one.
      • The alliance that does the last-hit on the Gigas Golem will put one of the following curses (randomly) on their opponents:
        • Points Curse - Stop the points gained from all sources for 3 minutes.
        • Stun Curse - Stun every opponent for 5 seconds every 45 seconds, for 3 minutes.

    CS Gameplay, Points & Rewards

    • [UPDATED] Kills & Points System is reworked:
      • TANK build is now considered ANY character (except of RF and ELF) that has AGI+VIT higher than 65% of Total Points.
      • Killing an Assistant now grants 1.5 * Default Points (from 2 * Default Points).
      • Killing a Battle Master still grants 2 * Default Points.
      • Killing a TANK now grants 2.5 * Default Points (from 3 * Default Points).
      • Killing a Guild Master now grants 4 * Default Points (from 5 * Default Points).
      • Default Points per kill is now 8 Points instead of 10 Points.
      • During higher kill points period, the points can now be changed to 10-18 Points instead of 12-25 Points.
      • The Reset Difference Points are now +- 0.5 Points based on the reset difference between killer and target.
      • New: In statues 8x8 range, you gain & lose 50% of the points you normally gain/lose in the same conditions but inside the CS room.
        • Example: If a Kill inside the CS room would net you 24 points, the same kill in the statues 8x8 range will get you 12 points.
      • The Minimum amount of Points that you can get for a kill inside CS room is now 5 Points (instead of 2), and still no Maximum value, no matter the type of kill or bonuses.
      • The Minimum amount of Points that you can get for a kill in Statue's range is 3 Points, and no Maximum value, no matter the type of kill or bonuses.
      • The reset difference formulas will always apply before any modifier, in the case of normal kills.
        • Example: If ADMIN kills Gion and ADMIN has 30 resets and Gion 27, while Kill Points are 8 then ADMIN gets 8-(0.5*3) = 7 Points. If ADMIN's alliance does control the West Statue then ADMIN gets +50%/100% * 7 Points = 11/14 Points on the same kill. If the kill is being made in Statue's range then ADMIN gets 6/7 Points.
      • Now the Battle Masters no longer ignore reset differences. Instead, they now gain + 25% points per kill for any normal target kill (that does not have any special role).
      • Apart from reset difference & special role, we now also have extra points gained per kill based on the current total points of the target:
        • You gain an extra 10% (inside CS room) / 5% (in Statues range) of the target total points per kill.
        • The extra points are going directly towards your Alliance and are not counted to your own points/performance, as well as not counted for the target feed points.
      • General Example:
        • Let's say ADMIN is part of OldSquad and Gion is part of ADMINS.
        • ADMIN has 20 resets, Gion has 17 resets.
        • ADMIN is also Assistant, Gion is a Guild Master.
        • ADMIN has 400 Kill Points, Gion has 200 Kill Points.
        • Default Points is the normal value (8 Points).
        • When ADMIN kills Gion (inside the CS room) this is what happens:
          • ADMIN gets 8*4 (extra Points from killing a GM) = 32 Points.
          • ADMIN's alliance (OldSquad) is getting 32 Points (ADMIN's performance) + 0.1 * 200 (extra points for alliance from Gion's total points) = 52 Points.
        • When Gion kills ADMIN (in statue's range) this is what happens:
          • Gion gets 8*1.5 (extra Points from klling an Assistant) * 0.5 (statue's range reduction) = 6 Points.
          • Gion's alliance (ADMINS) is getting 6 Points (Gion's performance) + 0.05 * 400 (half bonus extra points for alliance from ADMIN's total points) = 26 Points.
        • On old system:
          • ADMIN & OldSquad gets 10*5 (50 Points from killing a GM) = 50 Points.
          • Gion & ADMINS gets 0 Points because the kill was made outside the room.
    • [UPDATED] Now CS Initialization is made 9:30 minutes after CS does start (instead of after 14:30 minutes).
    • [UPDATED] Now every Alliance GM that is part of CS will get a Life Stone every 15 minutes (starting at 17:30) as long as his Alliance isn't currently having the most points at CS.
      • Note: The previous, unused Life Stones will be deleted when a new one is generated.
      • Note2: If Alliance GM does switch / reconnect / leave CS server, the Life Stone is deleted.
      • Note3: The Life Stone is gained only if the GM is online and on Valley at the moment when Life Stones are delivered.
    • [UPDATED] Now you no longer get an extra DEF Point if you stay on the Crown position as Defender GM.
      • You still get only half DEF Points if you are outside CS Room.
    • [UPDATED] Life Stones now have the maximum possible Defense but a HP of 175k (from 30kk).
      • Note: This means that no matter how many stats a character does have, it will do similar damage to Life Stones (50-300) so in order to kill them faster you need more people attacking them (no matter their total stats).
    • [UPDATED] Now you get the full DEF Points if the GM is in 5x5 range of the East Statue (DEF Points statue).
    • [UPDATED] DEF Points distribution:
      • 1 Point per second between 17:10 and 17:34.
      • 2 Points per second between 17:35 and 17:59.
      • 3 Points per second between 18:00 and 18:24.
      • 4 Points per second between 18:25 and 18:44.
      • 6 Points per second between 18:45 and 19:00.
    • [UPDATED] Removed TOP3 Contributors / TOP3 Stampers concepts. They are now replaced with a single TOP5 Net Worth:
      • Net Worth is an accumulation of every CS player activity & performance during each CS.
      • Formula for Net Worth calculation:
        • (Total Kill Points - (Total Feed Points * 0.7)) + Stamp Seconds + Activity Time where:
          • Total Kill Points = The amount of Points you personally contributed for you Team.
          • Total Feed Points = The amount of Points you gave away to other teams while being killed.
          • Stamp Seconds = The amount of seconds you held a Switch.
          • Activity Time = 0.15 Points for every second while a CS Participant is online in Valley during CS. This value is raised to 0.4 Points per second if the Player is inside CS room or in 5x5 range of the Statues.
      • Example of Net Worth:
        • ADMIN has 1400 Total Kill Points, 420 Total Feed Points, 200 Stamp Seconds, 60 minutes in valley during CS & 50 minutes inside CS room / statues.
          • ADMIN's Net Worth is: 1400 - (420*0.7) + 200 + 60*60*0.15 + 50*60*0.4 = 3046.
      • Note: Stamp Seconds are updated 1 time per minute.
    • [UPDATED] Now there's an individual reward based on Net Worth for any CS Player:
      • Minimum Points that your alliance must have gained at CS in order for the players to be eligible for individual rewards: 1500 Points.
      • Minimum Net Worth to be eligible for individual reward: 1000.
        • Default Reward: 10% chance for 1x OB5 / 90% chance for 10s/10c/10cr/10gem.
        • The Net Worth will dictate the % chance for getting the special box as reward, as following:
        • (NetWorth/100)% = box chance.
        • Examples: 
          • Having 1000 NetWorth = 10% chance for special box (OB5 in Inception's case).
          • Having 1200 NetWorth = 12% chance for special box (OB5 in Inception's case).
          • Having 2450 NetWorth = 24.5% chance for special box (OB5 in Inception's case).
          • Having 5500 NetWorth = 55% chance for special box (OB5 in Inception's case).
            • The rest of the chance is for guaranteed 10s/10c/10cr/10gem.
      • Bonus Reward: Players with 4000+ Net Worth will also win 2x VIP Days.
    • [UPDATED] Reworked summoner Sleep duration on CS server:
      • Under 5000 / 10000 / 15000 ENERGY (based on Stage) = Sleep is blocked.
      • 5000-7999 / 10000-15999 / 15000-26999 ENERGY (based on Stage) = Sleep duration is 2 seconds.
      • 8000 / 16000 / 27000 ENERGY (based on Stage) = Sleep duration is 3 seconds.
    • [UPDATED] Now summoner Sleep hit chance on CS server is 80%.
    • [UPDATED] Now players that are under Sleep effect on CS server can't be damaged.
      • The immunity gained by a player under Sleep effect does make him immune from being moved as well.
      • Note: With these changes we aim to introduce new ways of playing the Summoners at CS and new strategies around Sleep. You'll now have to react to Summoners and bring players to help with the Summoners and/or waste the Summon from DL just to save the Sleeping players.

    Extra Changes & Quality of Life

    • [UPDATED] Removed LOT entry Tax.
    • [UPDATED] Removed the global messages when killing GAs & BMs to reduce the spam (only GM & Tank kills are highlighted now).
    • [UPDATED] You can now use /rebuild until the CS does start. Which means you have 15 minutes of unlimited rebuilds (in case you make a mistake with the points).
    • [UPDATED] Now when typing /score you will see the following info:
      • On global (middle screen): 
        • Alliances score as usually + Players in valley for each alliance.
        • Current DEF Points / Kill points as usually.
        • Time left for the next Gigas golem spawn / ALIVE status.
        • West Statue & East Statue controllers (if any).
      • On system chat (top left side):
        • Your current Kills, Deaths, Kill Points, Feed Points, Net Worth.
        • The current Banned Build.
    • [UPDATED] Now when typing /score +Name during CS it will show you the same info of the Player that /score does show to you.
    • [UPDATED] Now /assist command that the assistants can use has a cooldown of 90 seconds instead of 120 seconds.
    • [UPDATED] Now /assist can be used in 3 ways:
      • /assist -> Will teleport the assistant to the GM.
      • /assist east -> Will teleport the assistant to the East Statue, if the guild is currently controlling the East Statue.
      • /assist west -> Will teleport the assistant to the West Statue, if the guild is currently controlling the West Statue.
    • [UPDATED] Now the points earned / bonuses, etc. are no longer rounded up / down. They are given as float values unless it is specified that something is rounded up/down (for example, avg. reset requirement for CS).
      • The final Points / Scores / etc. will still be counted as integers.
      • Example: If DEF points are 3 per second and you get + 50% DEF Points with the statue, then you'll get 4.5 Points instead of 4 or 5 Points.
      • Example2: If you get 25% more points as a BM and you kill a target that would give you 11 points, you'll get 13.75 Points instead of 13 points or 14 points.
      • Example3: If your alliance total points is 5563.60, you'll actually have 5563 Points. If your final NetWorth is 1120.7, then your NetWorth is 1120.
    • [UPDATED] Now Both Attackers & Defenders can spawn after dying anywhere before the first gates of CS & before the second gates of CS (60x - 95y -> 130x - 150y)
    • [UPDATED] Summon (DL) now has 80 seconds cooldown (from 50 seconds).

    Final Notes

    With the CS V3 release we aim to:

    • Make the CS way more interesting and less predictable.
    • Encourage smaller-scale fights outside of CS room (for Statues & Gigas).
    • Encourage lower tier guilds to participate at CS.

    Since we rewritten entire CS System code from scratch there may be bugs that you'll encounter (even with features that were 100% working before). Make sure to screenshot & report anything wrong you may find so we can fix it.

    Edited by ADMIN
    Updated with final changes before live events.

    "The only way to do great work is to love what you do" - Steve Jobs

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  120
    • Reputation:   56
    • Joined:  04/16/2021
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    This new system seems pretty nice and very unique , but there are some things , for me personally as long time player in this server, that i find not being the most balanced and also fixing the most important thing , which was activity on it(more guilds)+ competition.

    I will start from the top -

    Having 30 players in a guild + ally and 40 players from both can join cs will not solve the issue that we been facing all this time , that is having 2 guilds fighting for it , the focus here was to give chance to other guilds to win CS , but after X amount of cs's ive played here, having 40 players will not solve this , why? Lets say the 2 top guilds are full + whit enough ally to go , there would be 80 players on castle siege , only from 2 guilds , and whit this is basicly the same as before + huge mess. In my opinion stacking 40 players each guild/ally for CS is way to much and prevent new guilds to rise.

    in the V2 Cs system , there was some CS's ive played that 3 guilds participated , and i can give a recent example that was in last phoenix DB , where hardcore + nosgoth + squadron have fought for cs , while the chances for winning were higher for hardcore , squadron and nosgoth managed to register multiple times , and also when 1 registered, the other 2 were fighting for it , and the guild registered just had to control switches by letting each attacking guild having each switch , and there was one win for nosgoth that this happened , squadron holding one HC another . this is a just a example , there was few more CS's like this whit horde+nosgoth+hardcore , not many because drama is always present , but is very possible to be like this constantly specially in a non rr edition  and how ? How i see is like this -

    Maximum members in each guild should be max 20 and ally 20 
    -I truly believe that whit a less amount of max players in a guild can be forced for new guilds to be created and participate, because in a non rr edition most of the players that are not even in top 100 are in the same level as stats/gears and the chances of win are pretty high due to also other guilds competing
    -Its already hard sometimes to get 20 to play , and having a need to have 40 will be frustating.

    At cs u can join whit the 20players + 10 from ally but ally cannot go inside of castle.
    -Like this the 2 statues outside can be focused by 10 from ally , 5 on each one ( depending on calls and needs) and the 20 from guild fighting inside , that also can help outside if needed.

    Removing the 20% points u get from repairing statues to reduce the handicap.

    Removing the immunity buff that you can get from controlling the both statues. ( In my opinion having immunity is a buff should not exist in any way , it can be frustating to one guild dominate this and constantly save GM or strong BM's to survive and not die , specially the GM.) 
    - Just having the % on kill points and % on defense points are pretty much enough to make the difference.

    Gigas Golem
     - Stunning is very very powerfull , and we see it already just like being iced for example, and being stunned for 5secs every 30seconds during 3 minutes is really too much.
    I would switch this curse to a miss chances or slow for 2minutes every 30s , OR mixing both for 3 minutes whit a random chance every 30sec ( the slow that we cannot use antidote to recover , like the ice effect from the RF skill) it feels more balanced like this.

    - Points curse - the last 30minutes are crucial and stopping points from all sources during 3 minutes is huge , so instead of 3minutes of no points , cutting between 50% to 80% of all gaining points during 2 minutes feels more balanced also.

    One of the biggest thing i liked too see was the individual reward , it makes the players that plays buffer or going ice arrow or stamp or any other role , it makes them feel valuable and able to win something for they role+effort , and also the ones from ally fighting outside.

    And the rewards for it can be rethinked a bit instead of giving a pack of jwl or a ob5 , its 2 hours of gameplay and try hard , im not saying to give huge rewards but a bit more than a simple pack  or chance for ob5 can be added , for example X hours whit a max of 1-2days  added in the vip package ( if doesnt have vip a exp buff same as vip would be added for X hours whit a max of 1-2days) , all depeding on the networth made by the player , this is just an idea , any reward can be given at a certain progress of the game , i just feel that the rewards can be more interesting

    Even tho this new system hasnt been played yet , in my personal view and experience , this new features for sure have potential and will be pretty fun + competitive , but the amount of players in a guild needs to be reduced in order to new guilds being made , and being able to compete for cs , because when theres 3 guilds , specially now whit this system , the chances for the strongest guild of the server imo are highly reduced 


    Along whit some changes that for sure will be needed , the most important one for me personally is the max members ,  and some other that i pointed out are my opinions that would make the CS more balanced for the guilds participating 

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Members
    • Content Count:  49
    • Reputation:   14
    • Joined:  08/09/2020
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    I agree wit Chukundah for the most part. It’s difficult to find players to show up on Sunday. I’m not gonna address how it will be on inception, but I hope in Phoenix there’s a few changes. Fewer players in guild would make people spread out more and not flock to the biggest guild (who will have its best players invincible due to number advantage and their ability to hold the outside statues). I know you’ve done in the past stages to limit guilds and I think you did a great thing. I hope so you implement similar limits in Phoenix.I’d like to see it lower than 30/40 per guild/ally to encourage multiple guilds to show up. It’s not so fun CS with only 2 guilds. Even if it’s 3 or 4 parties per guild maybe it’s enough. 
     

    As for personal rewards, that’s a really great idea. Would be cool everyone who participates gets 1 gm box or something tho. It would encourage people to keep showing up to finish their sets and gathering items for wing mixes. Defense plays a big role in non RR server and even wit shit options, lots of players would be able to make high tier sets and it would in fact naturally balance out the server. Obviously the more you go to the better ur set will get, and it would possibly bring more players to join CS who have previously never bothered. Anyways maybe the rewards are could be tiered but top 10 stampers/killers can get the gm box  or something idk, you’re the boss.

    The points Chukundah touched on are well thought out and I hope you consider some of them for Phoenix :)

    Thanks for your time and all you do,

    Sincerely,

    Knightmare 

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Administrators
    • Content Count:  3,892
    • Reputation:   2,187
    • Joined:  12/30/2015
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    Quote

    Having 30 players in a guild + ally and 40 players from both can join cs will not solve the issue that we been facing all this time , that is having 2 guilds fighting for it , the focus here was to give chance to other guilds to win CS , but after X amount of cs's ive played here, having 40 players will not solve this , why? Lets say the 2 top guilds are full + whit enough ally to go , there would be 80 players on castle siege , only from 2 guilds , and whit this is basicly the same as before + huge mess. In my opinion stacking 40 players each guild/ally for CS is way to much and prevent new guilds to rise.

    in the V2 Cs system , there was some CS's ive played that 3 guilds participated , and i can give a recent example that was in last phoenix DB , where hardcore + nosgoth + squadron have fought for cs , while the chances for winning were higher for hardcore , squadron and nosgoth managed to register multiple times , and also when 1 registered, the other 2 were fighting for it , and the guild registered just had to control switches by letting each attacking guild having each switch , and there was one win for nosgoth that this happened , squadron holding one HC another . this is a just a example , there was few more CS's like this whit horde+nosgoth+hardcore , not many because drama is always present , but is very possible to be like this constantly specially in a non rr edition  and how ? How i see is like this -

    Maximum members in each guild should be max 20 and ally 20 
    -I truly believe that whit a less amount of max players in a guild can be forced for new guilds to be created and participate, because in a non rr edition most of the players that are not even in top 100 are in the same level as stats/gears and the chances of win are pretty high due to also other guilds competing
    -Its already hard sometimes to get 20 to play , and having a need to have 40 will be frustating.

    At cs u can join whit the 20players + 10 from ally but ally cannot go inside of castle.
    -Like this the 2 statues outside can be focused by 10 from ally , 5 on each one ( depending on calls and needs) and the 20 from guild fighting inside , that also can help outside if needed.

    Well, we always aimed the guild / alliance systems to encourage 4 guilds at CS, we had even 20 members / guild at CS at its lowest. We seen that it never worked out and we only had 3 guilds for few times and the rest of editions 2 guilds only. We no longer want to encourage 4 guilds at CS and we're focusing on 2, ideally 3 guilds. But in the same time we want more people to enjoy the most important event of the game, and not limit the pleasure of some that would want to join but don't have the slot / are not stronger than those 20-25 players selected in the guilds.

    For Phoenix especially (next Inception will be a different case), we'll have entire server stucked at same level for at least a week, multiple times, which means it should be kinda easy to have 120 players at cs (3 alliances), if people want to, and in worst case, we'll still have 80 players at cs.

    It is still a subject of change, but it is my own personal wish of testing such numbers.
    I am open for the idea of a pool before the Phoenix for this limit but there are certain conditions that won't be changed such as:
    - Ally guild will have 100% access at CS, not limited outside CS, that's for sure.
    - Total players at CS to not be lower than 30 per alliance.
    - Total members per guild to not be lower than 25.
    - And in the case that the lower options will be voted, the number won't stay static but it will be increased later on when we'll have only 2 alliances at CS again, so more players will be able to enjoy the CS.

    Quote

    Removing the 20% points u get from repairing statues to reduce the handicap.

    It was reduced from 25% but it will still exist as a motivation to invest & defend the gates/statues, as a Defender advantage, where the 5 minutes earlier start will help as well. There can't be only disadvantages for Defenders (handicap & no ban access).

    Quote

    Removing the immunity buff that you can get from controlling the both statues. ( In my opinion having immunity is a buff should not exist in any way , it can be frustating to one guild dominate this and constantly save GM or strong BM's to survive and not die , specially the GM.) 
    - Just having the % on kill points and % on defense points are pretty much enough to make the difference.

    I won't touch it until I see the CS in action. Holding both statues will (as I see it) be pretty hard when only 2 alliances do fight. But when there are 3 alliances, the underdog alliance have access to such joker, to focus the entire strategy around the statues and leaving the room fights for the other guilds. It may work out, it may not, we can only see it first before touching this mechanic (changing it / removing it). But of course, most of things are subject to change, they are just a base ground for what will actually be.

    Quote

    Gigas Golem
     - Stunning is very very powerfull , and we see it already just like being iced for example, and being stunned for 5secs every 30seconds during 3 minutes is really too much.
    I would switch this curse to a miss chances or slow for 2minutes every 30s , OR mixing both for 3 minutes whit a random chance every 30sec ( the slow that we cannot use antidote to recover , like the ice effect from the RF skill) it feels more balanced like this.

    - Points curse - the last 30minutes are crucial and stopping points from all sources during 3 minutes is huge , so instead of 3minutes of no points , cutting between 50% to 80% of all gaining points during 2 minutes feels more balanced also.

    Stun Curse - the ice & mix ideas are not bad, so we'll either raise the time to be stunned every 45 seconds (4 times stun in 3 minutes) or keep the 30 seconds timer and mix it randomly with either ice or stun for 3-4 seconds.

    Points Curse - It is a valid point, that if the last gigas is spawned & killed in the last 15 minutes can bring a big advantage, but it is also a matter of strategy. If you're not defender and get the curse at that point it won't be felt too much, if you're defender at that point you should bring a lot more players for the last gigas to keep your advantage, and in the same time you leave room more exposed. It can be a game changer for sure in the last minutes, but there are plays and counter-plays and I do believe it will be way more exciting as it is. Again, it is a kind of change that we need to see it live in order to change something.

    Quote

    And the rewards for it can be rethinked a bit instead of giving a pack of jwl or a ob5 , its 2 hours of gameplay and try hard , im not saying to give huge rewards but a bit more than a simple pack  or chance for ob5 can be added , for example X hours whit a max of 1-2days  added in the vip package ( if doesnt have vip a exp buff same as vip would be added for X hours whit a max of 1-2days) , all depeding on the networth made by the player , this is just an idea , any reward can be given at a certain progress of the game , i just feel that the rewards can be more interesting

    Rewards aren't fixed, there won't even exist the OB5 on Phoenix. But the rewards system will not be anything overpower but in the same time will motivate players enough to participate at least for the reward. Also, we don't want to have too big of a difference between a lower player / buffer / etc. and the top player from CS, keeping only the RNG advantage as difference based on higher Net Worths.

    "The only way to do great work is to love what you do" - Steve Jobs

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Members
    • Content Count:  54
    • Reputation:   29
    • Joined:  08/14/2019
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    [UPDATED] Guild System:
    - i myself also think that we will not have enough players for see 3 guilds participating
    - i would limit to max 25 guild members with 5 alliance members that could help(30 max in total)
    - i would give pheonix another chance with the max 30 members taking in acount the personal net worth that would defently make ppl come to CS, maybe we can get 4 guilds to participate this time :)

    [UPDATED] Handicap now has only 3 stages:
    - this is a goodea idea to encourage guild that would otherwise stand no chance

    [ADDED] CS Statues
    [ADDED] Gigas Golem
    - i like the concept, it would defently make CS more fun and less predictable
    - i am afraid that with the addition of statues, golems and summoner sleep there might just be to many things to focus on
    - both debuffs from golem are way to op in my opinion....5 seconds stun every 30 seconds for 3 minutes might just be to much

    [UPDATED] Now there's an individual reward based on Net Worth for any CS Player
    - best change so far as long as the ob reward matches the stage we are in
    - since all good ob rewards will be moved to new early/midd/boxes, i'm guessing we will get those instead

    - non-stampers, buffers and tank builds will now be rewarded for participation. 

    [UPDATED] Now players that are under Sleep effect on CS server can't be damaged.

    -i'm afraid that this would be very hard to play against. i would reduce the chance to land by a lot if the target will not take any damage


    Only time will tell if the new system is good or not, but one thing is for sure, a lot of tweaking will be necesery.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  325
    • Reputation:   33
    • Joined:  03/17/2017
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    So many changes, so much difficult, people who play this game play because it is easy and many are not capable of playing something more complicated. If we want complicated game, we would play another game.

    I would agree with the changes, with the diversity, but what is the point? for what are we fighting this CS? the reward for CS owners is not worth the time and effort.

    GM boxes, and what.. dont even need to win and you still can get more than half, no expenses added.

    380 weapons, and what.. now u got world bosses,  drop rate for weapon is higher than on gm boxes.

    for what to even struggle? to coordinate, to make strategies.. people who play this game want to 1vs1 duel  and to win, or will blame the settings and some times for good reasons (in my view cant understand some chars to be op for so long just because stage, its killing the game, example rf 1 hitting any char for like 1.5 months... i guess we need to focus on other aspects of the game)

    Most cant coordinate even in current settings, cant read properly many things.. most just wanna wait end of db and have what to brag next db that they are the best or w/e.

    on to the post,  below should not exist in my point of view.

    • If your alliance holds both statues then the following buff will be up for your alliance until you lose at least 1 Statue:
      • GM, Assistant & Battle Masters gain damage immunity, preventing them from being damaged, while the buff is active
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  120
    • Reputation:   56
    • Joined:  04/16/2021
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    5 hours ago, Mu3rTe said:

    So many changes, so much difficult, people who play this game play because it is easy and many are not capable of playing something more complicated. If we want complicated game, we would play another game.

    I would agree with the changes, with the diversity, but what is the point? for what are we fighting this CS? the reward for CS owners is not worth the time and effort.

    GM boxes, and what.. dont even need to win and you still can get more than half, no expenses added.

    380 weapons, and what.. now u got world bosses,  drop rate for weapon is higher than on gm boxes.

    for what to even struggle? to coordinate, to make strategies.. people who play this game want to 1vs1 duel  and to win, or will blame the settings and some times for good reasons (in my view cant understand some chars to be op for so long just because stage, its killing the game, example rf 1 hitting any char for like 1.5 months... i guess we need to focus on other aspects of the game)

    Most cant coordinate even in current settings, cant read properly many things.. most just wanna wait end of db and have what to brag next db that they are the best or w/e.

    on to the post,  below should not exist in my point of view.

    • If your alliance holds both statues then the following buff will be up for your alliance until you lose at least 1 Statue:
      • GM, Assistant & Battle Masters gain damage immunity, preventing them from being damaged, while the buff is active

    u took all the words i had for a long time in my mind about making such changes , wanted to say this for some time but ye .. 

    but beside this , changes are always good but at a certain point , and considering the previous state , as has muerte said about struggle coordinations strategies reading etc , 80% of the players do not play such events correctly and will never do it and this has been proved and seen many many X times and i witnessed it all over and over , even now in inception after all the DB's people just dont know how to play an event no matter how many times u explain it or say what to do in such a simple event.
    im not saying im the best and i know it all , but it is what it is , some players are better than others and have more gameplay wise than others and notice things.

    and muerte said a very simple phrase that its absolutely right " So many changes, so much difficult, people who play this game play because it is easy and many are not capable of playing something more complicated. If we want complicated game, we would play another game." 

    world bosses drops etc that can be changed of course , but in my first post just to not be disrespectfull to your work i tried to give some idea/visions as long termed experienced player , to try to make it less "hard and complicated" for the less gameplay wise players,  the things that u want to apply are very "complicated" and "hard" for the players i mentioned in the phrase above, specially the stun curse that is basicly a BM skill being used every 5 seconds during 30seconds ( that i also completly dislike and should not exist and switched to ice+miss (just a suggstsn)) , and the immunity buff , immunity buff is a BIG no no doesnt matter the circunstance , but is just my opinions . 

    about the max for cs im still very against of having 40 members to join cs per guild/ally , i understand ur wishes of tests etc , but in my view and imagening how a CS will be , if 20-25 dont even follow them in the V2 system ,  there is NO WAY to guide or give calls to 40 players , it will be pure chaos and such disorganization between everyone that trying to say anything or coordinate will be so frustating that the "leader" will just leave things in gods hand and hope for the best just to not get frustated over a game.

    I am open for the idea of a pool before the Phoenix for this limit but there are certain conditions that won't be changed such as:
    - Ally guild will have 100% access at CS, not limited outside CS, that's for sure.
    - Total players at CS to not be lower than 30 per alliance.
    - Total members per guild to not be lower than 25.

    i would like very much to see 120 players as u said , in worst case 80 , but definetly not 40 from 1 guild , if these are the conditions that u putting , in my view i highly suggest then to bring it down to 25 per guild and 30 total for cs ( the ideal would honestly be between 15-20) , just my suggestion , so a pool should be created imo since im most likely not the only one that agree's on this one

     

    10 hours ago, ADMIN said:

    For Phoenix especially (next Inception will be a different case), we'll have entire server stucked at same level for at least a week, multiple times, which means it should be kinda easy to have 120 players at cs (3 alliances), if people want to, and in worst case, we'll still have 80 players at cs.


    if we are getting stuck at same level for 1week + 2-3days max lets say , and multiple times , and as u saying - should be kinda easy to have 120 players at cs ( which i agree) and worst case 80 players . 
    why trowing out 80 players only in 2 guilds when whit this 80 we can make 3 guilds , and better case , 4 guilds whit 120 ? or even 5 and give more value to signs of honor .
    guilds whit less max members for CS have way more organizition and can be well more prepared and planned for it , even tho its not always the case , but its 99% more accurate than trying to do something whit 40
    most of us do not even have the time or patience for such thing , and theres far more players that play this game for fun / no tryhard 
    i would agree having 40 later on in the end game.

    10 hours ago, ADMIN said:

    We no longer want to encourage 4 guilds at CS and we're focusing on 2, ideally 3 guilds. But in the same time we want more people to enjoy the most important event of the game, and not limit the pleasure of some that would want to join but don't have the slot / are not stronger than those 20-25 players selected in the guilds.

    so we dont want to encourage 4 guilds to cs , but we want more ppl to participate on it and not limiting the pleasure that he would not join due to not be strong enough , 
    im gonna give examples here , starting from squadron - we never wanted the "weaker" ones to play , why ? u will play bad or feed points , same whit HC , same whit nosgoth , same whit horde etc , same whit every guild leader will say or think - " hes not good enough , pick other or go whit less 1 " , this is what happens , because X times in rankings there was players whit 30 40 50 60 70 deaths in a space of 1-2 cs's .

    So if i have 40 players to pick and 10 of them are in this category , i will leave them out , its the way the things work , not being arrogant or anything but it is like this even in a sports team ,

    so why stack 40 players in such a changed event to have such chaos , disorganization , dramas , literaly impossible to guide / calling out , having the time and patience to bring up strategies for after instead of enjoying it , we be leaving it out frustated 

    i dont want to spread hate or disvalue ur time that u come up whit this, for the contrary ,  as a "mu addict" like many others here , i appreciate the work and changes, and i do like this system , but for things that u see in ur vision , for us players that are more aware of the gameplay etc , we see it differently 

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  440
    • Reputation:   83
    • Joined:  05/10/2016
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    I would like to play cs v2 system in 15 players / guild or ally. Thats means we will make more guilds to participate and hopefully will be more fun. With this number even best guild will have problems trying to win the crown against 3 other alliances. Playing v3 system in 40 ppl will be a mess or will be a easy job for the guild that recruit the best players. We need to teach a gm to stay on the specific coordonates to gain 1 more point/sec and you want to play a so difficult cs?!😅  I agree with many things writed above me, but we see you're implicated and we like that. 

    I always tell the truth, even when I lie.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  120
    • Reputation:   56
    • Joined:  04/16/2021
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

     

    38 minutes ago, RedBuLL said:

    Thats means we will make more guilds to participate and hopefully will be more fun. With this number even best guild will have problems trying to win the crown against 3 other alliances

    15 would actually be very interesting too see.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Administrators
    • Content Count:  3,892
    • Reputation:   2,187
    • Joined:  12/30/2015
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    I clearly understand now, as the arguments were given, that it would be frustrating / hard to coordonate 40 players in this kind of environment, which I didn't thought deeper at first.
    But still, you had max 20 players at CS even this Inception db, in first month, with over 400 real players, and nothing happened out of it, as always. The better players preferred just to be some back-up for one of the 2-3 guilds and not play the CS at all instead of grouping up and forming 4th/5th guild and come to CS. This will never change, and it will be only an advantage for such "mega-guilds" over normal, lower tier guilds that doesn't have that many players but can ally with other lower tier guilds and make up for this disadvantage.

    Real examples:
    20 players in guild was the limit, but Guild A had 40 players (not alts) in alliance, always enough to fill the 20 spots, either on shared main chars from people that couldn't attend or with their own char, big enough. Guild B (lower tier) had 20 players in guild and only their alts in alliance. Their main guild was big enough at CS, but they couldn't have the 20 spots filled due to not everyone could attend the event and they didn't had that many players to fill those spots, so clearly a big disadvantage at CS.

    So what it will actually change? Just more benched players for the same guilds while the lower tier guilds can't even fill those spots. You can't force a player to be part of a guild / mega-guild, but it has no problem as being part of his own guild but in an alliance with another, where there are same rights.

    ----------------------------------------------------It's open for discussions----------------------------------------------------

    Now about CS V2. Since 80% of fights were between only 2 alliances, I'll talk only about this case (in 3 was a bit better). 2 ally fight:
    - Move crywolf stay AFK for SD regen & wait summon.
    - Get summoned inside room / near room.
    - Kill bufffers / lower players & move switchers / GM.
    - Register crown in 2-4 minutes.
    - Repeat.

    It wasn't neither hard or interesting gameplay. It was just better than the default system.
    Then we speak about wholes. There were CS-es won by 1 char in terms of Points (looking at Zutto) where the difference between the winner and the loser was exactly the points farmed by that character - without any possible counter-play. Doesn't matter if it was Zutto or any other chars, the top 2-3 killers were just changing the lose into a win, or vice-versa, and nobody could stop / react to it.

    When such Event can be decided mostly by few chars, it is not a healthy design.

    If 2 guilds were very close in terms of power (and it happened, multiple times), the win was in hands of 1-3 players, and only them. The other guild couldn't recover by any chance in such conditions, taking into account the highest amount of points from kills can be earned in first hour and no extra catch-up mechanism when only 2 guilds (the def-catch-up points are just split between the 2 guilds).

    So why do we need such dynamic changes? Well, for an actual interesting & dynamic event, where you can't predict the winners just by looking at their top killers.

     

     

    "The only way to do great work is to love what you do" - Steve Jobs

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Members
    • Content Count:  54
    • Reputation:   29
    • Joined:  08/14/2019
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    If Statue and Golem will be implemented on pheonix, i'd suggest at least implementing them one by one, not both at the same time, so we can gather some feedback.

    I think most ppl play Mu to be the character you are describing above and make the difference in CS just by getting more points from kills.

    I strongly believe that we should try one more time with the new 'net worth system' that would definitely bring more players at CS and limit max players to max 20 (15 guild/5 alliance). At least in early stages of phenoix where there is chance we would get 4 guilds participating in CS.

     

    If we go we 40 ppl in CS, we will have only 2 guilds for sure. And what would happen in this case? The new system with goldem and statue will not make the diference.

    The only difference will be made by the 'handicap system' and we will ONLY have the castle passed between 2 guilds, the only 2 guilds in fact. So CS will become even more predicatble than it already is. 

    Will it be more fun? maybe... Will it be less predictable? i think not

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Administrators
    • Content Count:  3,892
    • Reputation:   2,187
    • Joined:  12/30/2015
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    Quote

    If Statue and Golem will be implemented on pheonix, i'd suggest at least implementing them one by one, not both at the same time, so we can gather some feedback.

    All the changes of the V3 will be on Phoenix (ofc, adapted for the non reset). The first 2 CS-es will be especially for feedback & tweaks, having only the networth rewards.

    Quote

    I think most ppl play Mu to be the character you are describing above and make the difference in CS just by getting more points from kills.

    It is a big gap between "making a difference" and "secure a win". The individual performance will still matter a lot, but no longer be a "if I have those x players in ally we win, else we don't". It is a large scale pvp event, not a regular pvp event, it can't be decided only by few players.

    Quote

    we will have only 2 guilds for sure. And what would happen in this case? The new system with goldem and statue will not make the diference.

    Well, it is exactly the opposite. The predictable fights were especially when there were only 2 alliances. And it was way too easy to notice by anyone: Crown is constantly switched, so DEF points were spread more or less the same, and the only difference was who has the better killers would 100% win without any possible come-back from the others. With golems, statues & rest of the changes, there are a lot of ways for come-backs and game-changing situations.

    Quote

    The only difference will be made by the 'handicap system' and we will ONLY have the castle passed between 2 guilds, the only 2 guilds in fact. So CS will become even more predicatble than it already is. One week we will have X guild controlling the castle, the next week we will have Y guild controlling the castle.

    Not really. The new handicap isn't that hard to surpass for first 2 levels, compared to now, only on 3rd level is harder. The same alliance will still be able to control the CS multiple times, but no longer for 4-5 weeks straight as it was.

    Quote

    Will it be more fun? maybe... Will it be less predictable? i think not

    Fun - well, it can't have the same level of fun as:

    "- Move crywolf stay AFK for SD regen & wait summon.
    - Get summoned inside room / near room.
    - Kill bufffers / lower players & move switchers / GM.
    - Register crown in 2-4 minutes.
    - Repeat."

    It should be way more fun and interactive, for sure.

    Predictable - with constant game-changers I can't see how it can not be less predictable compared to who have the better killer(s) wins.

    As any large scale PvP event, the output will be decided based on the team play, communication and coordination, and less on the "individuals".

    "The only way to do great work is to love what you do" - Steve Jobs

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Members
    • Content Count:  54
    • Reputation:   29
    • Joined:  08/14/2019
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    The handicap is increased though now. I can't imagine 2 guilds fightning each other less preditable than 4 or more guilds fighting each other.

    I'm more worried about the numbers, not the statue or the golem.  I would not like to see the server divided in two. We already have gens for that.

    Also, with smaller numbers we need to be more tactical about it. We need to coordinate better who goes to the switches,crown,golem,statue etc. Kills would defently matter less. I can imagine it would be easier for better organised guilds to have a chance at winning.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  120
    • Reputation:   56
    • Joined:  04/16/2021
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    U have an answer for everything .. even tho the ones who repliying ( old players and experiencied ) is giving you the best feedback and most likely the best small changes .

    32 minutes ago, ADMIN said:

    As any large scale PvP event, the output will be decided based on the team play, communication and coordination, and less on the "individuals".

    Go try to be a GM in this player data base and i want to see you coordinate 30-40players in this new system

    I dont know what else i can say about this subject , dont get me wrong but u make such good changes but in same time some of them small changes are truly not the best and all of them has been pointed out , as i said above it does not need to be played to know what to expect of such small.changes that have bigger impact than the whole reworked system , its not about the statues ( besides of the immunty buff and stuns ) its about the guild numbers, the lack of gameplay wise of players, the ones that dont even read and try, and.forcing again 2 guilds and 1 dominate as always.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Members
    • Content Count:  49
    • Reputation:   14
    • Joined:  08/09/2020
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    Until you sit in discord with 25 yelling and peoples babies crying and angry wives freaking out 40 people in CS might seem cool but it’s just not practical. I been in many discord’s with a lot of players and let me tell you why they don’t show up to play CS. 
     

    1. They make polls, and when only 10 players say they go, the others cry and bitch and say they don’t go. 

    2. The gm boxes break friendships and cause so much drama, but seems like you are addressing this wit personal rewards so good job on that. I still think everyone should get a set item/ weapon whether it’s a bok 5 item with a low chance to drop 380 idk it won’t happen so I won’t bother.

    3. “We can’t win” loser mindsets, they see they lose by 10k points and crawl into their caves.

    4. They rather use the time to catch up on rankings.

    5. The time isn’t convenient for all, Australians and Vietnamese will have to be up at 3 am to play.

    6. Let me RE-iterate, not enough people. We went as 5v 20 and it wasn’t very fun for either side. Now will be going as 5-40 against invincible players x) 

    Anyways I truly believe you should let us try first few cs with personal rewards and a guild cap of 15. You will see people show up, and it won’t be so one sided.The feedback is clear, your player base is not wanting a 40v40 2guild CS. 

     

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Administrators
    • Content Count:  3,892
    • Reputation:   2,187
    • Joined:  12/30/2015
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    Quote

    The handicap is increased though now. I can't imagine 2 guilds fightning each other less preditable than 4 or more guilds fighting each other.

    It is increased yes, but not a big difference on first levels compared to how it was before:
    Old 2nd CS in a row: -1500 points.
    New 2nd CS in a row: -2500 points.

    Old 3rd CS in a row: -3500 points.
    New 3rd CS in a row: -6000 points (which was the same as 4th and 5th cs in arow on old system, that was surpassed).

    While it is an increase, it is still manageable if the gap is real between the winner & the rest. The real challenge is for 4th CS in a row.
    Basically keeping CS for 2 weeks is still easy, for 3 weeks is manageable, for 4 weeks+ is a challenge now.

    Quote

    I'm more worried about the numbers, not the statue or the golem.  I would not like to see the server divided in two. We already have gens for that.

    I already confirmed here that it won't stay as 40: 

    Quote

    I clearly understand now, as the arguments were given, that it would be frustrating / hard to coordonate 40 players in this kind of environment, which I didn't thought deeper at first.

    There will probably be again a dynamic system that will look like:
    Early game: Max 25-30 players at CS, guilds with 20-25 players max.
    Mid game: Max 30-35 players at CS, guilds with 25-30 players max.
    Late game: Max 35-40 players at CS, guilds with 30 players max.

    Again what matters is that we won't focus on 4 alliances, our aim is for 3 stable alliances. Ofc, there can be 4-5 alliances any time, not something that can't be possible or realistic to have. It's all about players split.
     

    "The only way to do great work is to love what you do" - Steve Jobs

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Administrators
    • Content Count:  3,892
    • Reputation:   2,187
    • Joined:  12/30/2015
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    8 minutes ago, Chukundah said:

    U have an answer for everything .. even tho the ones who repliying ( old players and experiencied ) is giving you the best feedback and most likely the best small changes .

    Go try to be a GM in this player data base and i want to see you coordinate 30-40players in this new system

    I dont know what else i can say about this subject , dont get me wrong but u make such good changes but in same time some of them small changes are truly not the best and all of them has been pointed out , as i said above it does not need to be played to know what to expect of such small.changes that have bigger impact than the whole reworked system , its not about the statues ( besides of the immunty buff and stuns ) its about the guild numbers, the lack of gameplay wise of players, the ones that dont even read and try, and.forcing again 2 guilds and 1 dominate as always.

    I'm not quite sure what you didn't understand, I specified yesterday that I agree that 40 players would be too frustrating / hard to coordonate, and that I didn't thought about this aspect.

    Later Edit: And also, if I didn't wrote yet about the changes doesn't mean I don't listen to the arguments and feedback, this are the planned changes before the actual release and before seeing the event live:
     

    Quote

    Changes compared to initial info (for now):

    • Curse Stun will be given out every 45 seconds instead of every 30 seconds (so 4 times / curse).
    • The damage immunity when holding both statues is now given only to the GM instead of GM+Assistant+BMs.

     

    Edited by ADMIN

    "The only way to do great work is to love what you do" - Steve Jobs

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  120
    • Reputation:   56
    • Joined:  04/16/2021
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    4 hours ago, ADMIN said:

    There will probably be again a dynamic system that will look like:
    Early game: Max 25-30 players at CS, guilds with 20-25 players max.
    Mid game: Max 30-35 players at CS, guilds with 25-30 players max.
    Late game: Max 35-40 players at CS, guilds with 30 players max.

    This would be the best option overall , the early game one 20(preferable) to 25(best 2nd option) , and increasing the max members as we see how the game progress and IF it would not be a 3rd guild then surely the best option is getting the 30max to the guild , worst scenario is when ppl start leaving or breaking etc then is the moment to increase the max members , but until such game state , the ideal one imo is the early game point that u mentioned,  and not touch it even in mid game , as long there is at least 3 guilds constantly participating .

    The immunity buff only for GM is not that bad at all , if ur decision to not remove this , this one is also ok and can actually be usefull if the "weaker" guild get it

    About summoner sleep, i think also it might be to over powered , i agree giving some use to this role but 80% chance and not being able to cancel by attack can be bit to much but this one i cant argue about before actually seeing it

    The stun thing i also think that it could be mixed instead of just stun  , mixing stun/ice and or miss.

    But good too see ur flexible and taking into account our feedbacks

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Members
    • Content Count:  113
    • Reputation:   20
    • Joined:  03/28/2020
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    HI, my 5 cents.

    I think that no restrictions will induce people to split into 3+ alliances. This community is teeming with drama, someone has offended one, someone has stolen items from another, someone is sucking all the juices out of the entire clan in favor of 3-5 characters.

     

    And this is just an event, 1 time a week, in the middle of the day, weekend ....summer....if you know what I mean. In fact, there will always be 3 guilds, hardcore, those who don't like hardcore, and Vietnamese)

    Having a smaller number of people in the guild also has its drawbacks, 15-20 people in the guild means 2 guilds of HC (for example) which will prevent the rest of the participants from capturing the seal.

    The second thing that pushes away from participating in the castle is the castle system itself, no matter what anyone said, but there was one advantage in the original system, there really was no way to predict who would become the winner, decided case, the position, and as always the strength of the characters decided. CS v2-v3 are also good to one degree or another, he made every minute important (of course I'm lying, only the last 15 minutes were important, maybe 30).

     

    As a result, as it was said earlier, both here and in the topic about the arena, the more complex the system is (specifically in this game) the less popular it is.Again, the example of Soccer and Arena. 

     

    If you want a good game, take care of the balance of the characters, and not "this", which has been going on here for several editions.

    Peace to all in this difficult time. DIEEEEEEEE 

    P.S. Remove finally my ban IP on forum ))

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites


    • Group:  Legends
    • Content Count:  440
    • Reputation:   83
    • Joined:  05/10/2016
    • Status:  Offline
    • Device:  Windows

    My suggestion is CS v3 in 15 players, golems should be win by the best dps, not last hit, because that can be pure luck. GM should not stay anymore on that coordonate for gaining +1 point because he is not usefull at all leading his guild to win. Why? Because he dont see the action. About the handicap I would like to see you giving the chance to that guild that win 4 cs in a row to start 5th Cs again with 1th handicap. Many task for such low members at cs will be fun and I think we can see 4th guild beeing there.

    I always tell the truth, even when I lie.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Reply to this topic...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

    Loading...
     Share

    ×
    ×
    • Create New...

    Important Information

    By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.