Curse

Chewbacca Defense · Feb 12, 2007, 03:03 PM // 15:03

Not that they'll go back and fix AB, but...

Suggestion to add DP to all Alliance Battles including Aspenwood & Quarry.

Without DP, the game has become mindlessly mobbing and killing stuff. With DP, some kind of strategy will be required as a death would result in -15%.

Alternatively, add a 10% moral bonus everytime an altar is capped (or for Aspenwood a gate is broken or fixed).

Evilsod · Feb 12, 2007, 04:21 PM // 16:21

You do realise that altars are capped practically every 20 seconds?

Adding DP to ABs is just lame... when 12 people come down on you at once with a mass of snares... by snares i mean shadow prison assassins you will die, get off to a bad start and you don't stand a frigging chance of coming back. Without DP its nice n balanced.

Angra · Feb 12, 2007, 04:33 PM // 16:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evilsod

You do realise that altars are capped practically every 20 seconds?

Adding DP to ABs is just lame... when 12 people come down on you at once with a mass of snares... by snares i mean shadow prison assassins you will die, get off to a bad start and you don't stand a frigging chance of coming back. Without DP its nice n balanced.

QFT.

Additionally, adding DP to aspenwood would flat out destroy it. One hit wipeout from turtles.

Chewbacca Defense · Feb 12, 2007, 04:51 PM // 16:51

I understand that adding DP would create some havoc, but that's only if people continue with the mob mantality. With the disadvantage of having DP, mob mantality would be reduced and the focus would shift to:

Capping Altars
Capping mines & running amber
Interrupting/degen Turtles

Not that AB is serious PvP, but right now it's just kill this and kill that without any thinking.

Alternatively, team based AB would be awesome. (i.e. you choose the 8 or 12 people to play - rather than the randomness that's going on now)

Skuld · Feb 12, 2007, 05:07 PM // 17:07

No, you die like 50 times a match.

The way to fix is to revamp the entrance mechanism, let you organise your own side of 12. Or prehaps split it like RA and TA, keep the current system in one instance, and let you do TA/GvG style in the new one. That would rock.

Arkantos · Feb 12, 2007, 05:16 PM // 17:16

Oh joy, I can see it now. People RQing because they got 60dp by being mobbed by a bunch of people. You want to fix AB, not kill it.

Alleji · Feb 12, 2007, 05:33 PM // 17:33

AB is fine as is...

As for organized 12v12 teams... yeah, right. There aren't too many people playing now, and everyone who's playing is there for fun, because rewards are practically zero. Imagine how many teams we'll have in the 12v12 arena...

If you want a parallel, look at RA and TA.

Skuld · Feb 12, 2007, 05:46 PM // 17:46

Up the rewards then :-/

Jeff Highwind · Feb 12, 2007, 05:51 PM // 17:51

OH HELL NO!
/notsignedwithavengence

Both Luxons and Kurzicks mob, and as stated before DP would only make people ratequit faster.

frojack · Feb 12, 2007, 07:52 PM // 19:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arkantos

Oh joy, I can see it now. People RQing because they got 60dp by being mobbed by a bunch of people. You want to fix AB, not kill it.

Exactly...

All this would achieve is more people rage-quiting sooner than they do now.

I understand the need to have some randomness in team selection. Let's face it. Some players are just a LOT better than others, and this takes the fun out of it. It's always an attractive challenge trying to salvage a match due to bad team mates. It's frequently rewarding, making you feel (or giving you the illusion) your squad made the difference in the battle. You can't really get that from organised high-end PvP .If you lose, it's usually a scissor-paper-stone build issue, your team played a bad game, or your opponents were simply superior. Not the feeling of a truly chaotic battlefield where your at the mercy of fate (skirmish patrol squads, area control. Think Napoleon, WW2 etc.). That's why AB is so popular.
In light of this, 12 v 12 is quite ridiculous. It would just become HA 2. Four sides of 6 might be an interesting experiment however...

c_ras · Feb 12, 2007, 08:25 PM // 20:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chewbacca Defense

Alternatively, team based AB would be awesome. (i.e. you choose the 8 or 12 people to play - rather than the randomness that's going on now)

I had thought about this idea awhile back but on a sort of different scale. Although in AB, you are fighting for your alliance to the Luxons or the Kurzicks, having a different type of Alliance Battles where TRUE guild alliances can go against other guild alliances would be cool. I wouldn't make it anything like the AB we have now or any of the PvP types of gameplay (GvG,RA,TA,HB,HA). It would be something new....something creative....something that isn't gay.

- Aldoros of Faydark

The Hand Of Death · Feb 12, 2007, 08:26 PM // 20:26

The reason I think people mob is because they individually have a better chance of surviving then lets say in a group of four people. In this sense I would think that this idea would backfire because people would mob in order to not die and get the DP penalty.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chewbacca Defense

Not that AB is serious PvP, but right now it's just kill this and kill that without any thinking.

Personally I think that this is the reason a lot of people do AB. I know I do it for this reason because sometime I just want to PvP and kill things just to have fun in trying to kill them. If this happened I think a lot of people would stop AB.

~Death~

Exterminate all · Feb 12, 2007, 08:50 PM // 20:50

/Not signed

Well this is because if you get a 10% moral boost in an ab match. What if you don't die? You get a 100% moral boast if you capture an altar 10 times?

That would be unfair, both of the teams would be uneven. This would not be fair at all.