Event WoE 2 6-2-2016 to 6-30-2016 - Page 7 - Classic Foundry - WarpPortal Community Forums

Jump to content


Photo

Event WoE 2 6-2-2016 to 6-30-2016


167 replies to this topic

#151 rojoky113

rojoky113

    Awarded #1 Troll

  • Members
  • 536 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Classic Loki

Posted 27 June 2016 - 10:21 AM

Take one 1.0 realm and one 2.0 realm, use them simultaneously for the third no god/no mvp woe. That would reduce the tons of empty castles some (though relatively more from 2.0 than 1.0 as 1.0 is somewhat healthier and doesn't need it as much) while giving people into 1.0 and people into 2.0 both a chance to play around in that ruleset. Then also maybe the gvg lovers will stick more to woe2 and give newer guilds hanging out in 1.0 some breathing room idk.

Also idk if there needs to be more castles removed than that in either format. There's no need for several empty castles for 5 man guilds to take 3 each, but there needs to remain some manuevering room and enough castles that smaller guilds wont be regularly forced out instead of just promoting a little more action and competition.

Edited by rojoky113, 27 June 2016 - 10:32 AM.

  • 0

#152 Aannunaki

Aannunaki

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Whatever

Posted 27 June 2016 - 11:45 AM

How handle treasure drops? Can't have not god mvp and yes god mvp active at the same time.
  • 0

#153 TheLeafs

TheLeafs

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 133 posts

Posted 27 June 2016 - 11:53 AM

How handle treasure drops? Can't have not god mvp and yes god mvp active at the same time.

 

I think only GSBs should be offered in woe 3. isn't the whole point of woe 3 creating a "balanced" server with no god/boss saturation ? why there would be a need for ACA's and god parts if one does not want more of them on the server ?


  • 0

#154 allygator1

allygator1

    Amateur Blogger

  • Members
  • 232 posts
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 27 June 2016 - 12:26 PM

woe 1: luinia, brit  : gods/mvp enabled

woe 2: nith, balder  : gods/mvp enabled

woe 3: valf, valk  : gods/mvp disabled

 

Disable 1 castle each.  8 castles to go around between each woe.  8 castles is plenty enough for 30 people to fight over.

 

Have all god item drops be randomized like renewal drop boxes to curb the flow of god items and to compensate for the lack of the last castle for that castle specific loot.

 

...

 

 

 


Edited by VModCinnamon, 27 June 2016 - 04:40 PM.
Potential flame bait, snip.

  • 0

#155 Aannunaki

Aannunaki

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Whatever

Posted 27 June 2016 - 12:55 PM

WoE 3 only needs 3 castle max
  • 0

#156 Rayea

Rayea

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 42 posts
  • Playing:Nothing

Posted 27 June 2016 - 12:56 PM

[...]

Have all god item drops be randomized like renewal drop boxes to curb the flow of god items and to compensate for the lack of the last castle for that castle specific loot.

 

...

 

 

That change resulted in reduced competition and stunted the grow of new guilds.
 


Edited by VModCinnamon, 27 June 2016 - 04:41 PM.
Edited in quote

  • 0

#157 Undying

Undying

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1327 posts
  • LocationBoston
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Odin

Posted 27 June 2016 - 01:16 PM

Woe 3 only needs 2 castles. Take one duplicate from valf and one duplicate from nid. Don't mess with woe 1 at all. Should be rewards and they should only be gsb and other consumables.

It's easier to mess around with redoing woe 2 loots then woe 1. Also the woe 2 loots are basically useless at this point anyways, as far as God components.

Edited by Undying, 27 June 2016 - 01:17 PM.

  • 2

#158 rojoky113

rojoky113

    Awarded #1 Troll

  • Members
  • 536 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Classic Loki

Posted 27 June 2016 - 01:36 PM

I seem to recall multiple people earlier asking for this format to be available in 1.0 too, which I personally think would be just as fun as well. Also, new/small guilds tend to woe 1.0 over 2.0. Wasn't part of this to give them an mvp/godless space as well? It's not like woe1 isn't full of empty castles too, there's no really good reason to exclude the 1.0 format when we are expanding woe options is there?

Unless we are dropping all pretense about this concept being entirely co-opted by solely woe2 gvg worshippers at this point.

Edited by rojoky113, 27 June 2016 - 02:13 PM.

  • 0

#159 Aannunaki

Aannunaki

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Whatever

Posted 27 June 2016 - 02:51 PM

Hurrah for stacking nothing but magic, acid bomb and fist behind CP!
  • 0

#160 Undying

Undying

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1327 posts
  • LocationBoston
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Odin

Posted 27 June 2016 - 03:04 PM

Unless we are dropping all pretense about this concept being entirely co-opted by solely woe2 gvg worshippers at this point.

 

I've been clear about my intention and agenda from the beginning (see foundry post). This WoE type is made to attract pserver players, which as much as we like or dislike is the best group of players to advertise to if we want a possible chance at a population boost. This alone will not fix Classic, but it is another way to attract players which we desperately need.

 

I can see points being argued about helping for people to learn. They aren't invalid. But for me specifically, I have always made it clear what the goal/purpose is. Which is a boost in population through any means necessary. 

 

Edit: Obviously I speak only for myself and represent no group of players at all. If others believe that it is a "good learning" environment, then that is their belief. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with them or fully agree. However, I also see it as a fun format personally. 


Edited by Undying, 27 June 2016 - 03:06 PM.

  • 0

#161 rojoky113

rojoky113

    Awarded #1 Troll

  • Members
  • 536 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Classic Loki

Posted 27 June 2016 - 03:23 PM

Ok that's great and all but there are players new and old here who wanted and would benefit from woe3 having a 1.0 component, and contrary to popular belief there are still some new/returning players coming to classic sometimes that aren't the pserver gvg crowd. Granted I have been gone a little while but last time I was around and we were discussing a 3rd woe its purpose was discussed as a duality of benefiting that crowd as well as new players/guilds. And newer players are going to fare a lot better in 1.0 than 2.0 vs pserver gvg-ers, even if there isn't a tendency for that crowd to stick to 2.0 like I think there likely would be.

So like I said unless you can point out a good reason we SHOULDN'T include 1.0 in some fashion (and feel free to do so, so it can be discussed), try to consider this from other perspectives other than just the one you're focused in on.

If this really is just all about the pserver crowd at this point my personal enthusiasm drops severely (and my opinion for rewards goes back to just gsbs). Maybe a few bad apples have painted a poor picture of them as a whole to me, but the ones from that crowd I have met have generally struck me as relatively unpleasant and as having even less regards for the rules than even classics normal population, which says something. And that is an issue that has already driven many people away from this game and server, myself included.

I may be starting to see why xellie seems as disgusted with all this as she does.

Edited by rojoky113, 27 June 2016 - 03:29 PM.

  • 0

#162 Aannunaki

Aannunaki

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Whatever

Posted 27 June 2016 - 03:32 PM

Portals, CP, alliances, numbers, cancer, achievements, WoE 1 godlike based creation competition, redoing treasure, but mostly because of alliances, CP, Portals.
  • 0

#163 Aannunaki

Aannunaki

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Whatever

Posted 27 June 2016 - 03:44 PM

I may be starting to see why xellie seems as disgusted with all this as she does.


I think so! She touched on it in her "something for everyone" topic and posts quite often about being driven away in favour of private server players. She also stated that what she calls "old iro style players" are being held accountable for the server's state
  • 0

#164 Undying

Undying

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1327 posts
  • LocationBoston
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Odin

Posted 27 June 2016 - 03:59 PM

Ok that's great and all but there are players new and old here who wanted and would benefit from woe3 having a 1.0 component, and contrary to popular belief there are still some new/returning players coming to classic sometimes that aren't the pserver gvg crowd. Granted I have been gone a little while but last time I was around and we were discussing a 3rd woe its purpose was discussed as a duality of benefiting that crowd as well as new players/guilds. And newer players are going to fare a lot better in 1.0 than 2.0 vs pserver gvg-ers, even if there isn't a tendency for that crowd to stick to 2.0 like I think there likely would be.

So like I said unless you can point out a good reason we SHOULDN'T include 1.0 in some fashion (and feel free to do so, so it can be discussed), try to consider this from other perspectives other than just the one you're focused in on.

If this really is just all about the pserver crowd at this point my personal enthusiasm drops severely (and my opinion for rewards goes back to just gsbs). Maybe a few bad apples have painted a poor picture of them as a whole to me, but the ones from that crowd I have met have generally struck me as relatively unpleasant and as having even less regards for the rules than even classics normal population, which says something. And that is an issue that has already driven many people away from this game and server, myself included.

I may be starting to see why xellie seems as disgusted with all this as she does.

 

My idea with it and the line of thinking goes like this. Most importantly, what would be the easiest thing for the GM's to do (i.e. the simpler the better). Secondly, lets address the excessive amounts of castles open. Third, what is a good environment that will both attract pserver players (important for population growth) and offer an incentive for existing players to participate.

 

WoE 2 has duplicate castles and the god item components are already worthless. I would guess that Valk Flowers required to make a bryn is worth more then several sets of the god item components. WoE 2 setting is ideal for the pserver population. In fact, it has been ideal for iRO players to participate in large scale fights throughout the last couple of years. Also please note that there are duplacate castles that could be used. Using the duplicate castles A. makes getting a WoE 2 castle a bit "harder" and B. they are a duplicate castle so would make sense to do this. It saves time from arguing which castles to convert over, since there are already duplicate ones. 

 

Below is the type of fighting that is being looked at to recreate. Permission from BOTH guilds in the video is obtained and it is used by both sides for advertisement/recruitment. It is in no way guild drama related for the reasons stated (both sides use it for recruitment on multiple servers). However, it is what we are looking for and an example of within the last couple years of some of the few "large scale" fights which really only existed in WoE2 in the past couple years.

Spoiler

 

WoE 2 environment (for a 3rd woe removal of guardians in the 2 open castles) would hinder an alliance precasting on a portal. That is true. It is a great and wide open area for plenty of action to occur. It fosters and environment that rewards tactical fighting, as opposed to sitting behind a portal with an alliance and as many HW macro'ing MS as possible. 

 

A personal priority for me in proposing this is to not effect the existing WoEs or to limit the impact of the 3rd WoE. Redoing WoE 1 (which has most important god item drops) is very off putting to me. It's not the problem, why change it? That being said, there are problems with it but that should be it's own discussion and Xellie has covered this quite extensively in the past.

 

For rewards I have always pushed for GSB. Part of this is for the above point of limiting the negative impact on the "real" woe's.  I called the 3rd WoE "practice addition" for a reason. It's not a "real" WoE. It's a means to advertise the game and offer a play style that many people enjoy. Please note, not everyone enjoys it but if we are looking to boost the population then adding something that many people enjoy is beneficial. It should foster an environment for pserver players and new players alike. 

 

What would it look like in reality? "Hardcore" (lol) pserver players will want to fight each other. If there are only 2 castles open then all of those like minded guilds will end up in 1 castle fighting for epride. The other castle will cater towards newer players or smaller guilds. Why only 2 castles? The entire point is to make 3rd WoE action packed by forcing action to occur. Even if its an illusion, lets make the server/woe look alive.


Edited by Undying, 27 June 2016 - 04:07 PM.

  • 2

#165 Aannunaki

Aannunaki

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Whatever

Posted 27 June 2016 - 05:42 PM

It's time to realise people look for different experiences. More people in more situations is good.
  • 0

#166 rojoky113

rojoky113

    Awarded #1 Troll

  • Members
  • 536 posts
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Classic Loki

Posted 27 June 2016 - 05:50 PM

Portals, CP, alliances, numbers, cancer, achievements, WoE 1 godlike based creation competition, redoing treasure, but mostly because of alliances, CP, Portals.

 

Alliances, CP and portals already exist in woe 1, except now they have hibrams, megs, sam spec/thana katars, etc. Seems to me like dealing with them would be a fair bit easier for less established guilds under this third woe's rules, if not exactly pleasant still. That said I've already stated my opinion that alliances shouldn't even exist in real woe at this point, there really is no excuse for them to exist when there isn't mvps and gods to QQ about as justification for needing 3 guilds backing any 1 up to play. Hell, you could even disable CP if you really wanted.

 

I really can't be -_- to care enough to argue about it that hard though, doesn't seem like this is aimed much at all about helping newer players and guilds develop any more anyway so idk why it'd be worth debating if it would help them or not. Staff can go ahead and roll out the red carpet to the circles of players flagrantly disregarding client edit rules in all their woe videos, most of whom prolly can't even remember where their potting keys are physically located anymore, and classic can enjoy all the longevity pservers always do. if it ends up how I expect I probably won't participate much anyway and I'm far past wasting my time trying to point this server in a better direction to no avail. Would be far from the first nail in classics coffin (lol 300 pop with bots and vends) but who knows maybe it will be the last for some depending on how the server changes.


Edited by rojoky113, 27 June 2016 - 06:38 PM.

  • 0

#167 Aannunaki

Aannunaki

    I made it Off Topic

  • Members
  • 53 posts
  • Playing:Nothing
  • Server:Whatever

Posted 27 June 2016 - 06:06 PM

Asura and bomb will continue to be as deadly without those things. Gods and MVPs offer solutions that are viable in small numbers. Lord knights aren't viable without top end gear - although they are necessary in breaking a precast, no guild can field enough people to do so.

When was the last time you broke a standard precast without you know who playing people trains and distractions? A wannabe lord knight-cum-emperium breaker, who gets further than anyone only to complain about reaching an imperium designed for a server with godlike.
  • 0

#168 Undying

Undying

    Too Legit To Quit

  • Members
  • 1327 posts
  • LocationBoston
  • Playing:Ragnarok Online
  • Server:Odin

Posted 27 June 2016 - 06:42 PM

Alliances, CP and portals already exist in woe 1, except now they have hibrams, megs, sam spec/thana katars, etc. Seems to me like dealing with them would be a fair bit easier for less established guilds under this third woe's rules, if not exactly pleasant still. That said I've already stated my opinion that alliances shouldn't even exist in real woe at this point, there really is no excuse for them to exist when there isn't mvps and gods to QQ about as justification for needing 3 guilds backing any 1 up to play. Hell, you could even disable CP if you really wanted.

I really can't be -_- to care enough to argue about it that hard though, doesn't seem like this is aimed much at all about helping newer players and guilds develop any more anyway so idk why it'd be worth debating if it would help them or not. Staff can go ahead and roll out the red carpet to the circles of players flagrantly disregarding client edit rules in all their woe videos most of whom prolly can't even remember where their potting keys are physically located anymore, if it ends up how I expect I probably won't participate much anyway and I'm far past wasting my time trying to point this server in a better direction to no avail. Would be far from the first nail in classics coffin (lol 300 pop with bots and vends) but who knows maybe it will be the last for some depending on how the server changes.


I agree with the allience aspect. There shouldn't be alliances and guild limit should be lowered. These things should have happend a while ago...

I find it hard to discuss things or to motivate you to discuss facts/logic for a simple reason. You care tremendous, which in itself isn't a bad thing at all. However, when feelings over power the ability to think logically it makes it hard to understand the point. we agree with alliances. We agree on an additional woe, we disagree on the intention of the woe. We disagree on castle choices, yet we agree there are too many castles currently open. We agree on more points then you realize. Continueing to discuss options and very importantly which options are best in a logical way will help tremendously. Middle ground can be made, IF personal feelings are removed and we look at it in a logical sense.

To address the feeling aspect, we are all in the same boat. We are frustrated for many many different reasons. We are scared of the future and health of the server. Most importantly we care about the game, otherwise none of us would volunteerily waste as much time as we do. Our feelings are the same.

Now that feelings can be removed because we are on the same page anyways....

For the intention of a 3rd woe. Yes it would cater to attracting pserver players. However, the more I think about it the more I see this.... When any of us started and/or began learning about RO there was no "even ground". As a new player we all experienced losing and sometimes losing horrifically for periods of time until we bettered ourselves or knowledge of the game. The basic principle that the playing field is "even" (as much as possible) is a HUGE benefit for anyone starting the game, in comparison to most players past experience. So my personal intention is to cater to pserver players to address the population issue. However, WP intention could be to provide a learning area. Somebody else's intention could be to whatever. Intention overall is to better the server and add player base, there are side effects to that such as offering a more "user friendly" area for newer players to learn, compared to how old school players learned.

Secondly, I would like to know your thoughts on why woe1 castles? I understand the playerbase that enjoys woe1 and attendance. Beyond that, is removing castles here worth redoing the loot distribution? Which castles in woe 1? For woe2 it is simple since there are duplicate, but in woe 1 there isn't any duplicate. How many castles would you surgest doing for a 3rd woe? What rewards would you like to see?

I am really interested in your thoughts to these questions and working on a logical conversation from there. You have knowledge and preferences and I rather see you voice them in a highly constructive way rather then saying -_- it. Why? Because I care about what you think.
  • 0



Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users