93 replies to this topic

[5318130516144610857]

Stop saying I'm excusing anything, that's another one of your lies. I'm too old or mature, call it how you want, to enter this phrase by phrase reply game. I said what I had to, you have your own biased opinion but be careful with your words and what you say out of respect to who you are talking to and the readers. Being rude is very easy, specially for someone from a guild like yours. You make a lot of claims and remarks about me that are lies, re-read and think for yourself. And if you feel the urge to reply again, try at least to stay on topic.

Edited by 5318130516144610857, 24 August 2017 - 01:24 PM.

[paopaopee1]

Hhahahahaahaah
Wrecked burn savage hahahhaha

[5318130516144610857]

Hhahahahaahaah
Wrecked burn savage hahahhaha

Hey, what's the worst can happen from your collective behaviours? PvP deserted WOE maps, less income for WP, and a game far below its potential and what it could've been.... so be it. Cheaters win!

[Sigilyph]

Stop saying I'm excusing anything, that's another one of your lies. I'm too old or mature, call it how you want, to enter this phrase by phrase reply game. I said what I had to, you have your own biased opinion but be careful with your words and what you say out of respect to who you are talking to and the readers. Being rude is very easy, specially for someone from a guild like yours. You make a lot of claims and remarks about me that are lies, re-read and think for yourself. And if you feel the urge to reply again, try at least to stay on topic.

 

I asked for actual evidence for them cheating but the reply I had was "bok bok dead woe they make great videos"

I asked for explanation why I lie and my opinions are biased.

I asked how what everything I said are just claims.

 

I'll now ask ;

 

How did you get the idea I am rude with my posts ? I speak with the facts.

How did you get the idea I am actually a part of guild B? 

How did you get the idea I am disrespectful for actually being unbiased in this argument ? Like I said, I actually judged the guild B aswell, I used to be biggest B guild hater. But unlike you, they dont overreact and call everything I said "Lies" or "Biased opinions". 

 

Better stand up with your own claims to deny whatever I said, give people actual evidence or noone will actually take you serious. 

[5318130516144610857]

OK. Keyboard warrior detected. I have nothing to prove to you and it certainly won't be here anything will be done about cheating issues.

[7843140731162112220]

"Keyboard warrior detected", say the one abandoned ro2 ingame war's just to be keyboard warrior here.
Or keyboard warrior also applied to people who play ro2 using keyboard?

[coffeelover]

Agree:
- side A need to improve the chars and strategic moves;
- side B is way more experienced players with good chars;
- side B play defensive, using Alt guild to secure/reset map when risk increase a bit (my question in this point is: if they clearly are more powerful, why act like that since it is not needed at all and make woe less competitive? Pls, don't answer "because everybody can do it" or "because others have done it before".)

Disagree:
- side A change guild's name's not for recruitment or to be aknowledge, but bc its members kinda demmand it as a merge so every original guilds can have a council/leader (I think it is too political, non-practical and it makes massive disband easier when they fail);
- side B don't attack smaller guilds (in fact, they do attack them since it is not their allies with the excuse of "make sure that second biggest guild keep without any fortress")
- it is a war and it doesn't need to have fair-play (it actually is a game and at least the most experienced players should care about the competitive environment and fair-play);

Fact about using bug to take advantage:
- ecall inside PF castle without break other gates down (side A);
- crescentia on orb to prevent damage and protect it easier (side B ).

Cya \o/

Edited by coffeelover, 25 August 2017 - 04:15 AM.

[5318130516144610857]

Dual or Multi-clienting during WOE is allowed. It is morally condemnable yet many do it.
Recalling inside PF through Battle Leap skills is confirmed allowed move. It is morally condemnable too. Why not use it against a guild that has no problems whatsoever using and abusing bugs and all sorts of cheats?

Like I've said in the past, I put the blame in WP more than I do on players but that this point, it seems the two are blent together and Odin became a private server. Nothing new to be honest, this has been a reccuring problem for players who don't like to butt-kiss those who work in that company as far back as when the game was released in 2013.

[Sigilyph]

Agree:
- side A need to improve the chars and strategic moves;
- side B is way more experienced players with good chars;
- side B play defensive, using Alt guild to secure/reset map when risk increase a bit (my question in this point is: if they clearly are more powerful, why act like that since it is not needed at all and make woe less competitive? Pls, don't answer "because everybody can do it" or "because others have done it before".)

Disagree:
- side A change guild's name's not for recruitment or to be aknowledge, but bc its members kinda demmand it as a merge so every original guilds can have a council/leader (I think it is too political, non-practical and it makes massive disband easier when they fail);
- side B don't attack smaller guilds (in fact, they do attack them since it is not their allies with the excuse of "make sure that second biggest guild keep without any fortress")
- it is a war and it doesn't need to have fair-play (it actually is a game and at least the most experienced players should care about the competitive environment and fair-play);

Fact about using bug to take advantage:
- ecall inside PF castle without break other gates down (side A);
- crescentia on orb to prevent damage and protect it easier (side B ).

Cya \o/

 

I wanna point out some stuff.

 

Side A changing its guildname is requested by the merging guilds, Im aware of that . But the following part "so every original guilds can have a council/leader" is not true from my aspect.  I have seen several guild merges while being the member of A , sometimes even in council, but I have never seen equality among the council between the council of newly formed guild. Leader is always from guild A , most of council are from guild A and mostly other guild's council members doesnt have any power above the members in general. I dont know how it is at the moment but this was the situation when I left. 

 

Side B dont attack smaller guilds could be seen as a false fact. But read carefully what I said, "They do not always attack". You gotta understand from that they actually sometimes attack to anyone.

 

It is a game mode designed to be competitive war. People are focusing to win, because like I also said, no guild has to carry about keeping the game mode alive. Any smart guild leader would understand these words, no guild will give you free castles or forts, will lose in purpose to boast your ego so you wont quit,while risking his members. Examples related to this matter can be seen in 2013 woe alliances. Besides, in a case of a mmo, you cant expect a true fair play in that aspect. If a guild simply outnumbers you, they will probably laugh at you when you say you fight outnumbered. 

 

Ecall inside structures without breaking gates was also seen in the past used by B before.

 

Using a crecentia is indeed lame. 

 

 

About leap thing ; 

 

I want you to be honest on this. Warriors are not invisible classes. Even under invisibility, you get revealed upon casting a spell. The chokepoints on the main gate of prontera are also limited. I'd actually be suprised when we talk about a guild that has been succesfully defending a map with 4-5 raids every woe fails to notice a warrior trying to leap thru specific spots. Do you actually think Side A recalls by using warriors ? Lol

[5318130516144610857]

Yes, I do. And do you actually think the reason why one side is empty currently is not as a main factor due to cheats and GM access abuse? This is what I meant with them don't caring about having a competitive WOE. When you cheat to those levels, you change all the rules of the game and healthy competition can not exist, even if one side is weaker than the other on true fair-play game. Too obvious to me to even have to state it. Have fun in your unpopulated maps, bok-boks! Don't brag yourselves of great achievements or speak with some sort of moral authority when you have absolutely none.

[Sigilyph]

I'll ask once again, do you have any proof?

[coffeelover]

I wanna point out some stuff.

Side A changing its guildname is requested by the merging guilds, Im aware of that . But the following part "so every original guilds can have a council/leader" is not true from my aspect. I have seen several guild merges while being the member of A , sometimes even in council, but I have never seen equality among the council between the council of newly formed guild. Leader is always from guild A , most of council are from guild A and mostly other guild's council members doesnt have any power above the members in general. I dont know how it is at the moment but this was the situation when I left.

Side B dont attack smaller guilds could be seen as a false fact. But read carefully what I said, "They do not always attack". You gotta understand from that they actually sometimes attack to anyone.

It is a game mode designed to be competitive war. People are focusing to win, because like I also said, no guild has to carry about keeping the game mode alive. Any smart guild leader would understand these words, no guild will give you free castles or forts, will lose in purpose to boast your ego so you wont quit,while risking his members. Examples related to this matter can be seen in 2013 woe alliances. Besides, in a case of a mmo, you cant expect a true fair play in that aspect. If a guild simply outnumbers you, they will probably laugh at you when you say you fight outnumbered.

Ecall inside structures without breaking gates was also seen in the past used by B before.

Using a crecentia is indeed lame.


About leap thing ;

I want you to be honest on this. Warriors are not invisible classes. Even under invisibility, you get revealed upon casting a spell. The chokepoints on the main gate of prontera are also limited. I'd actually be suprised when we talk about a guild that has been succesfully defending a map with 4-5 raids every woe fails to notice a warrior trying to leap thru specific spots. Do you actually think Side A recalls by using warriors ? Lol

Yah, I get your point, for sure. And I mostly agree, as well.

Just about the merges: that was about my experience in last, let's say, 3-4 recent merges. That was the way they have doing that.
About the attack to small guilds, I got it, it's just because it was seeming that they don't attack them at all, but yes you did point out "not always".
And about the fair play, I didnt mean they should give some fortress on purpose, or that they should respect the number of players from their opponents, I just tried to highlight how that Alt guild move is decreasing competitiveness. But yes, I agree that people in general don't care about that kinda stuffs, it's just expected from experienced players (not that they are gonna do it, it's just expected).

Regards ^^

[Meddric]

In WOE there are big guilds there are small guilds but there should not be any rule "X cannot attack z". Big guild Small guild its all the same, why even mention about Big guilds attacking small guilds for any type of reason. Its WOE isnt it.

 

 

 

And some of you guys saying Alt guild move decreasing competitiveness, why not deal with those 'Alt Guild'? When you say ALT guild it means secondary guild and not 'allies' right? Is it very hard to beat alt guild then? 

 

 

Cos no matter what's discussed here, it may not represent what each guild thinks or does, calling names for what purpose?

 

 

[coffeelover]

In WOE there are big guilds there are small guilds but there should not be any rule "X cannot attack z". Big guild Small guild its all the same, why even mention about Big guilds attacking small guilds for any type of reason. Its WOE isnt it.



And some of you guys saying Alt guild move decreasing competitiveness, why not deal with those 'Alt Guild'? When you say ALT guild it means secondary guild and not 'allies' right? Is it very hard to beat alt guild then?


Cos no matter what's discussed here, it may not represent what each guild thinks or does, calling names for what purpose?

Big x Small guilds
As we've discussed it is not about the purpose of woe itself (guild vs guild) but in fact it's about competitiveness and fair play, which is expected but certainly not mandatory (and has not been applied mostly). In that matter, big guilds and small guilds ain't the same.

Alt guild
Yes, we've meant secondary and not allies guilds. And usually there is no fight with them, that's why they ain't beated. As we discussed the Alt guild usually goes to secure a fort/reset map, which mostly happens when that specific emperium isn't being fully attacked or they firstly/quickly have access (ie, east/west/south PF). The few times when some battle happens the Alt guild usually is defeated (as it happened some WoE ago in West fort MF).

Discussion
Well, of course what is discussed don't represent what each single guild think or does, it's basically impossible to do that. And that's why mostly we are trying to bring some facts (not only pure opinion) and discussing about then, which is the purpose of forums isn't it? The more people doing that, the better is the discussion.

Have a nice day/night ^.^

Edited by coffeelover, 26 August 2017 - 04:48 AM.

[adamch]

It's important to set priorities. The most important asset a guild has is its members. When members made the commitment of 2 hrs a week to attend WoE, the guild has to perform at optimum abilities based on the capacity of the day. A guild with 20-40 members may try their chances at forts while a guild with at least 60 may go for castles. It is mandatory for a guild to provide its members the playtime they required for the effort they make for attending WoE. It all depends on what the guild can offer to keep motivating its members and satisfying their gaming experience. Planning to overachieve is as bad as being under performed. Every decision a guild make should always based on the best interest of its members first and foremost.

 

The effort put in by a guild for WoE should also be in line with the result it yields. Apart from the time a guild put in for recruitment and ensuring their members attend WoE, a guild must also plan, coordinate and communicate with its member to ensure everything goes accordingly during that 1 hr. Sometimes what you put in may not guarantee results because the guild may have invested in something that is not worthwhile or simply the effort given is just not adequate. Whats important is to constantly explore different options and not give up. It's all about who is more well prepared and who is not. This can be seen during WoE from the numbers of members a guild has to coordination of the raids and performance during the war. You cannot blame a guild for having more members because they are well prepared for it than others.

 

Lastly to tie up all mentioned above, a guild with clear cut priorities with sufficient effort made will get the results they seek. There are 5 forts and 2 castles available for WoE. It's all entirely up to guilds to contest to their best abilities to get them. It has never been any other guilds fault that one are not capable enough to acquire something. This is WoE and this is War. Only the strong prevails and remains. Take a step back and explore within your own guild to see what can be done better. No one has control over external factors and the only thing that can be changed is within your own guild. Focus on making your own guild better rather than blaming someone else including own members for the shortcomings. 

 

 

 

 

[5318130516144610857]

100% off topic. What's the point of going to WOE if one guild can become invulnerable, see everything that is being said in other guild chats or pull test-daggers at their will? When EMP is taken by a guild that does not even have 1 of their players around while 2 others are hitting it ?
No competition can be made under these conditions. Mafia guild wins.

[7843140731162112220]

HaHaHaHa

[5318130516144610857]

HaHaHaHa

Why didn't you HaHaHa to your own rant ? No need to answer, we all know why.

[7843140731162112220]

Hahahaha

[coffeelover]

It's important to set priorities. The most important asset a guild has is its members. When members made the commitment of 2 hrs a week to attend WoE, the guild has to perform at optimum abilities based on the capacity of the day. A guild with 20-40 members may try their chances at forts while a guild with at least 60 may go for castles. It is mandatory for a guild to provide its members the playtime they required for the effort they make for attending WoE. It all depends on what the guild can offer to keep motivating its members and satisfying their gaming experience. Planning to overachieve is as bad as being under performed. Every decision a guild make should always based on the best interest of its members first and foremost.

The effort put in by a guild for WoE should also be in line with the result it yields. Apart from the time a guild put in for recruitment and ensuring their members attend WoE, a guild must also plan, coordinate and communicate with its member to ensure everything goes accordingly during that 1 hr. Sometimes what you put in may not guarantee results because the guild may have invested in something that is not worthwhile or simply the effort given is just not adequate. Whats important is to constantly explore different options and not give up. It's all about who is more well prepared and who is not. This can be seen during WoE from the numbers of members a guild has to coordination of the raids and performance during the war. You cannot blame a guild for having more members because they are well prepared for it than others.

Lastly to tie up all mentioned above, a guild with clear cut priorities with sufficient effort made will get the results they seek. There are 5 forts and 2 castles available for WoE. It's all entirely up to guilds to contest to their best abilities to get them. It has never been any other guilds fault that one are not capable enough to acquire something. This is WoE and this is War. Only the strong prevails and remains. Take a step back and explore within your own guild to see what can be done better. No one has control over external factors and the only thing that can be changed is within your own guild. Focus on making your own guild better rather than blaming someone else including own members for the shortcomings.

Sure, motivation, member's priorities, effort in to reach out the objective, never give up... All it's true and I share that thoughts as well... However, they can't be applied to the game right now. All you said it's true in a called perfect competition scenario, in which there are many competitors, all of them have similar features and none of them has any influence in the competition results.
Currently the game doesn't have many PvP guilds, the few of them don't have similar features, and we all know that there is a big guild that can make influence in results.
(And just to avoid "stop blame others" or "so it's not my fault" comments, I'm not blaming anyone here, I'm just trying to make a point about the post above).

See y'all o//

[5318130516144610857]

Hahahaha

OK.

[WikaraSeta]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model

Stages of grief

The stages, popularly known by the acronym DABDA, include:

1. Denial – The first reaction is denial. In this stage individuals believe the diagnosis is somehow mistaken, and cling to a false, preferable reality.
2. Anger – When the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue, they become frustrated, especially at proximate individuals. Certain psychological responses of a person undergoing this phase would be: "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; "Who is to blame?"; "Why would this happen?".
3. Bargaining – The third stage involves the hope that the individual can avoid a cause of grief. Usually, the negotiation for an extended life is made in exchange for a reformed lifestyle. People facing less serious trauma can bargain or seek compromise. For instance: "I'd give anything to have him back." Or: "If only he'd come back to life, I'd promise to be a better person!"
4. Depression – "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to die soon, so what's the point?"; "I miss my loved one, why go on?"
   During the fourth stage, the individual despairs at the recognition of their mortality. In this state, the individual may become silent, refuse visitors and spend much of the time mournful and sullen.
5. Acceptance – "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it; I may as well prepare for it."
   In this last stage, individuals embrace mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. People dying may precede the survivors in this state, which typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable condition of emotions.

[coffeelover]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%BCbler-Ross_model

Stages of grief
The stages, popularly known by the acronym DABDA, include:

• Denial – The first reaction is denial. In this stage individuals believe the diagnosis is somehow mistaken, and cling to a false, preferable reality.
• Anger – When the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue, they become frustrated, especially at proximate individuals. Certain psychological responses of a person undergoing this phase would be: "Why me? It's not fair!"; "How can this happen to me?"; "Who is to blame?"; "Why would this happen?".
• Bargaining – The third stage involves the hope that the individual can avoid a cause of grief. Usually, the negotiation for an extended life is made in exchange for a reformed lifestyle. People facing less serious trauma can bargain or seek compromise. For instance: "I'd give anything to have him back." Or: "If only he'd come back to life, I'd promise to be a better person!"
• Depression – "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?"; "I'm going to die soon, so what's the point?"; "I miss my loved one, why go on?"
  During the fourth stage, the individual despairs at the recognition of their mortality. In this state, the individual may become silent, refuse visitors and spend much of the time mournful and sullen.
• Acceptance – "It's going to be okay."; "I can't fight it; I may as well prepare for it."
  In this last stage, individuals embrace mortality or inevitable future, or that of a loved one, or other tragic event. People dying may precede the survivors in this state, which typically comes with a calm, retrospective view for the individual, and a stable condition of emotions.

That's useful but it doesn't give us anything... Both side can say that the other side is in such stage...
but thanks for sharing knowledge...

^.^

[Sigilyph]

Reason why Side A is losing is quite clear lol.

 

 

 

Stop making excuses and just reconsider your priorities as a guild and try to improve at least once for the past 3 years. 

[coffeelover]

Of course there's more than that based in all facts already discussed, but true a great and short-term thing to do is improve char's build and guild strategy, such as balance of classes, attack and defence moves as a guild and not as an individual player, timing and coordinate to push, etc (not gonna write down all topics, sorry XD ).