[ Renewal ] Current State of WoE - Page 2 - Ragnarok 1 Community Chat - WarpPortal Community Forums

Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 12 votes

[ Renewal ] Current State of WoE


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
1165 replies to this topic

#26 djxstatik

djxstatik

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 164 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles CA
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Renewal Chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:12 PM

I think the only real problem with removing alliances is that guilds would probably form NAPs, although I suppose those at least require more coordination to maintain.

a lot of coordination, to the point where it may be more trouble then its worth.  LETS SAVE WOE!


  • 0

#27 Pred

Pred

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 200 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:14 PM

^

 

I'm not sure removing alliances will really solve much of anything.  Though I guess it might actually help with lag.  Instead of 3 guilds squaring off against 3 guilds on the same screen, the defenses and rushes would have to be tiered so there'd be less people on screen at once.

 

Would take a lot of coordination.  Sounds challenging.  Sounds fun.  I'd love to help plan a 3 guild defense scheme with friendly fire on.

 

And if we lower the maximum guild character limit as well, it'd be even more interesting to plan 4-5 guild defenses with friendly fire on.  Could even split into 6 guilds so we have 6 different recalls for all kinds of flanking strategies.

 

I actually kind of like those ideas.  Would make WoE more about intelligent use of resources as opposed to STAND HERE CAST THERE.

 

What these ideas wouldn't stop, is guilds' willingness to work together.  There's still be a number difference between the sides, just instead of everyone fighting everyone all at once, it'd be more about successive smaller battles.


  • 5

#28 Alaska

Alaska

    Too Legit To Quit

  • RO Fungineering
  • 4793 posts
  • LocationMontreal, Canada
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:15 PM

a lot of coordination, to the point where it may be more trouble then its worth.  LETS SAVE WOE!

 

Yeah, I agree. At the very least I think it would be a good start! And yes, let's. :3

 

 

^

 

I'm not sure removing alliances will really solve much of anything.  Though I guess it might actually help with lag.  Instead of 3 guilds squaring off against 3 guilds on the same screen, the defenses and rushes would have to be tiered so there'd be less people on screen at once.

 

Would take a lot of coordination.  Sounds challenging.  Sounds fun.  I'd love to help plan a 3 guild defense scheme with friendly fire on.

 

And if we lower the maximum guild character limit as well, it'd be even more interesting to plan 4-5 guild defenses with friendly fire on.  Could even split into 6 guilds so we have 6 different recalls for all kinds of flanking strategies.

 

I actually kind of like those ideas.  Would make WoE more about intelligent use of resources as opposed to STAND HERE CAST THERE.

 

What these ideas wouldn't stop, is guilds' willingness to work together.  There's still be a number difference between the sides, just instead of everyone fighting everyone all at once, it'd be more about successive smaller battles.

 

 

I mean in all honesty if a bunch of guilds want to go through all the effort to coordinate something like that, then more power to them, I guess. At the very least it would require more and better planning to maintain, and I think it still leaves room for some counterplay from opposing guilds and whatnot. Although if I'm to be honest, my hope would be the guilds that are defending will get tired and eventually go off to do their own thing and try to secure their own castles. :P

Regardless, I think it would be easier for smaller guilds to form if the member cap per guild was smaller - and that's something I'd really like to see, more guilds being formed and playing competitively.


Edited by Alaska, 28 October 2014 - 08:25 PM.

  • 0

#29 miliardo

miliardo

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1894 posts
  • LocationSan Diego California
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:24 PM

^

I'm not sure removing alliances will really solve much of anything. Though I guess it might actually help with lag. Instead of 3 guilds squaring off against 3 guilds on the same screen, the defenses and rushes would have to be tiered so there'd be less people on screen at once.

Would take a lot of coordination. Sounds challenging. Sounds fun. I'd love to help plan a 3 guild defense scheme with friendly fire on.

And if we lower the maximum guild character limit as well, it'd be even more interesting to plan 4-5 guild defenses with friendly fire on. Could even split into 6 guilds so we have 6 different recalls for all kinds of flanking strategies.

I actually kind of like those ideas. Would make WoE more about intelligent use of resources as opposed to STAND HERE CAST THERE.

What these ideas wouldn't stop, is guilds' willingness to work together. There's still be a number difference between the sides, just instead of everyone fighting everyone all at once, it'd be more about successive smaller battles.


+1
  • 0

#30 cybernetic

cybernetic

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 2300 posts
  • LocationSydney, Australia
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:24 PM

^

 

I'm not sure removing alliances will really solve much of anything.  Though I guess it might actually help with lag.  Instead of 3 guilds squaring off against 3 guilds on the same screen, the defenses and rushes would have to be tiered so there'd be less people on screen at once.

 

Would take a lot of coordination.  Sounds challenging.  Sounds fun.  I'd love to help plan a 3 guild defense scheme with friendly fire on.

 

And if we lower the maximum guild character limit as well, it'd be even more interesting to plan 4-5 guild defenses with friendly fire on.  Could even split into 6 guilds so we have 6 different recalls for all kinds of flanking strategies.

 

I actually kind of like those ideas.  Would make WoE more about intelligent use of resources as opposed to STAND HERE CAST THERE.

 

What these ideas wouldn't stop, is guilds' willingness to work together.  There's still be a number difference between the sides, just instead of everyone fighting everyone all at once, it'd be more about successive smaller battles.

 

pred4pres


  • 0

#31 djxstatik

djxstatik

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 164 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles CA
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Renewal Chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:33 PM

^

 

I'm not sure removing alliances will really solve much of anything.  Though I guess it might actually help with lag.  Instead of 3 guilds squaring off against 3 guilds on the same screen, the defenses and rushes would have to be tiered so there'd be less people on screen at once.

 

Would take a lot of coordination.  Sounds challenging.  Sounds fun.  I'd love to help plan a 3 guild defense scheme with friendly fire on.

 

And if we lower the maximum guild character limit as well, it'd be even more interesting to plan 4-5 guild defenses with friendly fire on.  Could even split into 6 guilds so we have 6 different recalls for all kinds of flanking strategies.

 

I actually kind of like those ideas.  Would make WoE more about intelligent use of resources as opposed to STAND HERE CAST THERE.

 

What these ideas wouldn't stop, is guilds' willingness to work together.  There's still be a number difference between the sides, just instead of everyone fighting everyone all at once, it'd be more about successive smaller battles.

 

yeah you said what I was thinking. Good stuff!

 

Pred 4 President.
 

I haven't seen Chaos Theory woe for a while.


  • 0

#32 Myzery

Myzery

    They pay me to post.

  • Banned
  • 6670 posts
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:36 PM

^

 

I'm not sure removing alliances will really solve much of anything.  Though I guess it might actually help with lag.  Instead of 3 guilds squaring off against 3 guilds on the same screen, the defenses and rushes would have to be tiered so there'd be less people on screen at once.

 

Would take a lot of coordination.  Sounds challenging.  Sounds fun.  I'd love to help plan a 3 guild defense scheme with friendly fire on.

 

And if we lower the maximum guild character limit as well, it'd be even more interesting to plan 4-5 guild defenses with friendly fire on.  Could even split into 6 guilds so we have 6 different recalls for all kinds of flanking strategies.

 

I actually kind of like those ideas.  Would make WoE more about intelligent use of resources as opposed to STAND HERE CAST THERE.

 

What these ideas wouldn't stop, is guilds' willingness to work together.  There's still be a number difference between the sides, just instead of everyone fighting everyone all at once, it'd be more about successive smaller battles.

 

That's the problem, you're still wanting to out number everyone 3-1 with the numbers you have currently.


  • 1

#33 Leodls

Leodls

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 68 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:44 PM

Free for all baby! Down n Dirty!


  • 0

#34 Mulder1

Mulder1

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1610 posts

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:51 PM

There are just 2 ways to solve this... Absolute Lock & Absolute Break!


  • 0

#35 Pred

Pred

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 200 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online

Posted 28 October 2014 - 08:52 PM

I don't see it as a problem that we enjoy fighting alongside our friends against a common enemy.  If the others can't muster enough friends to fight alongside them to come at us, that's their problem, not ours.


  • 2

#36 Myzery

Myzery

    They pay me to post.

  • Banned
  • 6670 posts
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 28 October 2014 - 09:05 PM

You enjoy making the server population drop is what you're saying.

Friends can still compete against each other and have fun at the end of the day.

Also, you don't berate and belittle your friends, or at least you don't in my eyes. When I was in Animosity, people constantly put down Sinergia and to a lesser extent, CS.

 

Eventually there will be no one for you to fight, so it's a really bad argument.

 


  • 1

#37 Tofu

Tofu

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Public Security Section 9
  • 3287 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 09:38 PM

I'd rather have people to fight, than just tell ghost stories for 2 hours every Saturday.

It's not good when I'd rather do homework than WoE.
  • 13

#38 DeathDealer

DeathDealer

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 437 posts
  • LocationJefferson State
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 09:44 PM

Yea i dont see the fun in lop sided fights just because people have "more friends" they wanna hold hands with in WoE. I guess if i were using a bully mentality i could see the fun. But tbh the lag in those castles destroy any resemlence of fun and I WoE for fun, not any other reason. Which is why i agree on lowering guild size and alliance size. Yes u would still have "friends" fighting along side each other but it means more strategy and takes some incentive out of being in a large NAP which would help make all guild sizes more viable and even the playing ground some. This means more fun for all and in turn more people join WoE.
  • 7

#39 Divine

Divine

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 190 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:00 PM

I don't see it as a problem that we enjoy fighting alongside our friends against a common enemy.  If the others can't muster enough friends to fight alongside them to come at us, that's their problem, not ours.

 

What ...

 

It is a big issue when people use these "friends" to group up and drive an entire guild off the server because they dont like them. Driving away competition in WoE so you dont have anyone else to fight is a stupid thing because it leads to a very stagnant and boring WoE Environment. When BOTH sides agree that WoE is lopsided, boring, and are dissatisfied with it then it is a problem for everyone.

 

People are providing great ideas to create a better woe environment. These are issues that are plaguing Classic and Renewal, so I think GMs really should pay attention to what their players are saying, provide feedback as to what they can do and what they think about the current WoE situation.


Edited by Divine, 28 October 2014 - 10:01 PM.

  • 9

#40 mantap123

mantap123

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 145 posts
  • LocationMD
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:04 PM

Yea i dont see the fun in lop sided fights just because people have "more friends" they wanna hold hands with in WoE. I guess if i were using a bully mentality i could see the fun. But tbh the lag in those castles destroy any resemlence of fun and I WoE for fun, not any other reason. Which is why i agree on lowering guild size and alliance size. Yes u would still have "friends" fighting along side each other but it means more strategy and takes some incentive out of being in a large NAP which would help make all guild sizes more viable and even the playing ground some. This means more fun for all and in turn more people join WoE.

 

+1 for this. 


  • 0

#41 ChakriGuard

ChakriGuard

    They pay me to post.

  • Members
  • 7815 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Sakray

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:31 PM

What ...

 

It is a big issue when people use these "friends" to group up and drive an entire guild off the server because they dont like them. Driving away competition in WoE so you dont have anyone else to fight is a stupid thing because it leads to a very stagnant and boring WoE Environment. When BOTH sides agree that WoE is lopsided, boring, and are dissatisfied with it then it is a problem for everyone.

 

People are providing great ideas to create a better woe environment. These are issues that are plaguing Classic and Renewal, so I think GMs really should pay attention to what their players are saying, provide feedback as to what they can do and what they think about the current WoE situation.

 

You also cant blame them either Divine. They have every rights to do whatever they want. The question you might want to ask is why, they hate that "guild" so much to the point they want to drive the entire guild off the server. I do not know what guild in the question is but if it happens to be the same guild in my head right now, I perfectly understand their motive. :p_devil:

 

But lets hope WoEs in iRO can be restored and everything will work out just fine. I honestly do not want to start all over again in Thai RO, although the server is ultimately very healthy. :p_ang:


Edited by ChakriGuard, 28 October 2014 - 10:37 PM.

  • 0

#42 slwl1

slwl1

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 212 posts
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 28 October 2014 - 10:50 PM

You also cant blame them either Divine. They have every rights to do whatever they want. The question you might want to ask is why, they hate that "guild" so much to the point they want to drive the entire guild off the server. I do not know what guild in the question is but if it happens to be the same guild in my head right now, I perfectly understand their motive. :p_devil:

 

But lets hope WoEs in iRO can be restored and everything will work out just fine. I honestly do not want to start all over again in Thai RO, although the server is ultimately very healthy. :p_ang:

i think you better think twice to start thai ro soon cause once a lot of players are quitting the server will not handle the lost of funds which = close server yay


  • 0

#43 Easyy

Easyy

    Awarded #1 Troll

  • Members
  • 636 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 28 October 2014 - 11:14 PM

You enjoy making the server population drop is what you're saying.

Friends can still compete against each other and have fun at the end of the day.

Also, you don't berate and belittle your friends, or at least you don't in my eyes. When I was in Animosity, people constantly put down Sinergia and to a lesser extent, CS.

 

Eventually there will be no one for you to fight, so it's a really bad argument.

+1

we GVG smokies/Arctic every now and then and its great fun.


  • 2

#44 kiddomaddo

kiddomaddo

    Awarded #1 Troll

  • Members
  • 510 posts
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 29 October 2014 - 01:01 AM

Hello,

 

Such topics have had no impact on the WoE scenario. At the end human nature/desire overcome the health of the server and we continue on the same path.

 

But I am still hopeful that one day we will all make a change for the betterment of the server.

 

This may be a long shot, how about we have a WoE dedicated thread. Its sole purpose would be for guilds to put down what they intend to do. For example :

 

Guilds : carrot guild + balloon guild ally

Population estimate : 11.25 players

Interested in : Defeding poring island / Fighting book guild

 

Now this does not have to be an exact plan for your guild. You may change your strategy but it does give a rough idea of who is going to WoE with how many people and who they are allied to. So let's say a 3 guild alliance with 32000 people is going to be defending a castle, you may choose to ignore them totally and have fun elsewhere.

 

Ofcourse there can be guilds lying about their numbers and alliances, but that would mean you can count on other guilds who do give an approximate clear picture of what they are. Then you can find it easier to plan GvGs with similar numbers.

 

This can only work if no feedback is put on the thread. If someone lies, you know they have lied and cannot be trusted. No need to call them out.

 

I know this idea is far from good but maybe throwing out more would lead to something that might help the WoE scenario.

 

Thank you for reading.

 

*PS: I have not WoE'd for close to a year now and am assuming that not much has changed in the past year.

 

 


  • 1

#45 Alligator2405

Alligator2405

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 105 posts

Posted 29 October 2014 - 06:04 AM

Agree with Alaska. Guilds with less people and limited alliances for sure. This is an old game, less and less people play it, there is no point of a lot of guilds allied with full attendance, while the rest of the server is dead.


  • 2

#46 WarlockFier

WarlockFier

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 3395 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Silph Road

Posted 29 October 2014 - 08:57 AM

The 18th October Woe was one of the most interesting, intense and challenging battle the server has had in the longest time. Judging from a lot of the WOE videos, and being there myself, I am sure many of us cannot deny that there were a lot of actions. There was a lot of anticipation, suspense, and surprises that happened that day. It was a change of wind and it was exciting and fun, despite it was laggy. There were strategies, plans, goals, and coordination from the ever-struggling alliance to finally overcome the dominant alliance for once because they finally have enough man power to take on the battle. There was also a  little silly 'twist surprise' at the end as well that made the WOE scene funny and had many people chuckled over it. We like to make siege fun. We just simply cannot do it on our own.
 
Sadly, that didn't last. It seems to be a recurring thing that every time the struggling alliance triumphs the dominant alliance, the dominant alliance consumes one huge part of the forces from their opponent, strengthening themselves and weakening their opponent even more. This immediately revert things to the way it has been again, lop sided alliance. This is the 2nd time it has happened, and this time, there really isn't any other way for the struggling alliances to put up a fair anymore even if they ally the remaining WOE guilds on the server. I personally prefer the scale would have been smaller so there's less lag. It's just not possible when half the server allies up.
 
I'm not interested in participating in WOE 2.0 with the current situation. The scenario is too predictable to even be part of it. We know it's not going to be fun being bulldozer over by not just huge number of players, but also more gods and mvps that the dominating alliance have. I know many guild don't feel alone about this, and thus canceled their WOE together and causing the dominant guilds to have to GvG themselves for 'fun', and defend empty forts.
 
Thanks for the fun while it lasted, we will see to what happens next I guess. I'm not quite holding my breathe about it. ultimately it is up to the players on the server to decide what they want more. A dead server farming, or more epic fights like the 18th October's, or if it was even ever made possible by the GMs, smaller GvG guilds. Whichever happens, hopefully it wouldn't be too late to prevent a Ymir 2.0 again. There is no more other server to merge except for Classic to increase the population on iRO.
 
./2cents

Edited by WarlockFier, 29 October 2014 - 09:04 AM.

  • 8

#47 Alaska

Alaska

    Too Legit To Quit

  • RO Fungineering
  • 4793 posts
  • LocationMontreal, Canada
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 29 October 2014 - 09:04 AM

You know, even if I agreed with the "nothing will change there's no point" comments, nothing will ever get done with that attitude, and maybe that's why WoE has been dying for as long as it has. I'm not expecting immediate changes, I don't think anyone is, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with letting CMs/GMs know that we're not happy with how things currently are.

 

That being said, thanks to everyone who's offered up their insight so far.


Edited by Alaska, 29 October 2014 - 09:05 AM.

  • 5

#48 HayrohsLegacy

HayrohsLegacy

    They pay me to post.

  • Members
  • 6755 posts
  • Location名古屋、Japan
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Loki Champ & Chaos RG

Posted 29 October 2014 - 09:06 AM

Not our problem anymore.


  • 1

#49 Alaska

Alaska

    Too Legit To Quit

  • RO Fungineering
  • 4793 posts
  • LocationMontreal, Canada
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 29 October 2014 - 09:08 AM

Good attitude, good attitude.


  • 0

#50 miliardo

miliardo

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1894 posts
  • LocationSan Diego California
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Chaos

Posted 29 October 2014 - 09:13 AM

Put yourself in our shoes.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users