Jump to content


Photo

Castle Bid

Castle Bid Guild PvP

  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1 Ðarknight (Elgore)

Ðarknight (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Locationin the confines of the mental universe

Posted 07 December 2019 - 09:51 PM

 I am here to post my comments and suggestions on bidding in castles:
 
 Some players conquer castles and try to keep this castle without PvP. They, like me, make an offer with a secondary guild so that other guilds cannot invade your castle. Is this a problem? No. But guilds of the ninth level and below, with war protection, can bet. I'm here, I ask you to disable guilds below level 10, that is, guilds that cannot be part of the PvP content by choice of the leader so that they cannot bid on castles. It makes no sense that the guild is immune to war, participates in PvE content without the intervention of other guilds, and can even invade castles; This makes the guild skill that blocks wars useless. Grateful for your attention
 
Ðarknight
 

Edited by Ðarknight (Elgore), 08 December 2019 - 12:28 AM.

  • OctacoreFx (Elgore) and EdgyDalmaska (Elgore) like this

#2 Talestra (Elgore)

Talestra (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1206 posts

Posted 08 December 2019 - 12:28 AM

Guilds under 10 level  are considered still growing, developing. They can't, unlike of higher-level guilds, make their choice between PvP and PvE, so they are shielded from forced PvP mode - guild wars. Still these guilds can willingly take part in other PvP activities. Castle sieges are voluntary: you can't be forced to take part in a siege, you do it by your own will. Therefore I can't see a reason why guilds of a low level should be denied taking part in the sieges. At least they may try a siege before making their choice at the 10 level.



#3 EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 427 posts
  • LocationThe World.

Posted 08 December 2019 - 04:28 AM

Guilds under 10 level  are considered still growing, developing. They can't, unlike of higher-level guilds, make their choice between PvP and PvE, so they are shielded from forced PvP mode - guild wars. Still these guilds can willingly take part in other PvP activities. Castle sieges are voluntary: you can't be forced to take part in a siege, you do it by your own will. Therefore I can't see a reason why guilds of a low level should be denied taking part in the sieges. At least they may try a siege before making their choice at the 10 level.

The point here is:

These guilds aren't growing, people make separate guilds on their alts only for the purpose of out-bidding others on sieges so that their main guild can keep the castle. Sure it makes sense that new guilds are protected, but not in the system that can be so easily abused, and on a server that has only few main competing guilds.

 

This has been around for a very long time, especially visible in the "glory days" of Quality Content who would use 6 guilds to keep one castle on each, while all of these guilds were under 10 level and had barely 1-2 MEMEbers. they could avoid battles by bidding another empty "guild" with higher price than the other bidders right before the event's start. I agree that this is unfair, also because a person can declare war on someone and then move all their PvE chars to a "save place" to abstain from losing their PvE benefits while using PvP chars to attack PvE players.

 

Would be great to see some tweaks, both - at sieges and at guilds.


  • ChristineLeigh (Elgore) likes this

"Show some humility. One day's victory is another day's defeat. REMEMBER IT!" - Shingen Takeda


#4 Genius (Elgore)

Genius (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 309 posts
  • LocationNorth Korea

Posted 08 December 2019 - 06:19 AM

 

 I am here to post my comments and suggestions on bidding in castles:
 
 Some players conquer castles and try to keep this castle without PvP. They, like me, make an offer with a secondary guild so that other guilds cannot invade your castle. Is this a problem? No. But guilds of the ninth level and below, with war protection, can bet. I'm here, I ask you to disable guilds below level 10, that is, guilds that cannot be part of the PvP content by choice of the leader so that they cannot bid on castles. It makes no sense that the guild is immune to war, participates in PvE content without the intervention of other guilds, and can even invade castles; This makes the guild skill that blocks wars useless. Grateful for your attention
 
Ðarknight

 

 Please change your profile picture. Grateful for your attention

 

Genius


  • Ficadeboaai (Elgore) and EdgyDalmaska (Elgore) like this

   Not a Genius

  sSp4ucZ.jpg?1


#5 Talestra (Elgore)

Talestra (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1206 posts

Posted 08 December 2019 - 09:42 AM

The point here is:

These guilds aren't growing, people make separate guilds on their alts only for the purpose of out-bidding others on sieges so that their main guild can keep the castle. Sure it makes sense that new guilds are protected, but not in the system that can be so easily abused, and on a server that has only few main competing guilds.

 

This has been around for a very long time, especially visible in the "glory days" of Quality Content who would use 6 guilds to keep one castle on each, while all of these guilds were under 10 level and had barely 1-2 MEMEbers. they could avoid battles by bidding another empty "guild" with higher price than the other bidders right before the event's start. I agree that this is unfair, also because a person can declare war on someone and then move all their PvE chars to a "save place" to abstain from losing their PvE benefits while using PvP chars to attack PvE players.

 

Would be great to see some tweaks, both - at sieges and at guilds.

 

 

Current siege system is crippled. I don't see sense to invent new crutches for this lame duck.



#6 EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 427 posts
  • LocationThe World.

Posted 08 December 2019 - 12:54 PM

Also, another thing related to Guilds and PvP I wanted to give some attention to while this topic is still visible are guild wars and the way people run "guilds" these days.

 

For the last, maybe 2-3 weeks, the guild I'm currently in had 4 wars. 3 of these wars has been paid off, however, one of the surrender prices was so high that the leader wasn't willing to pay for it, even with donations. So we had to wait for the option to surrender around 2 weeks after we are actually defeated. Now, the problem here is as follows:

 

Our guild consists in majority of PvE players.

The guild that declared war is in Majority PvP.

We decide to not pay for the surrender.

Enemy guild safely transfers all their PvE characters to their save guild(s) while leaving there only PvP Dark Knights and Crusaders.

Most of our PvE players now either die on bosses (and other spots), leave the guild, or not take part in the war at all.

Result in war is 67:127 because enemy's PvE players safely changed the guild so they can easily farm points on us, while we struggle to kill them even in 6v4 situations.

 

That wouldn't be a problem if PvE characters within enemy guild couldn't just "leave" like that, so both sides would have equal chance for getting kills in the war.

 

So what is the point of being in a guild if anyone can change guild anytime they wish.

There is no consequences in changing guilds all the time (except for 1m gold for the bonuses which some people even ignore because of how often they change).

And the cooldowns for joining new guilds became so short that they're completely irrelevant right now (if there are any at all).

 

Guild is supposed to be a community/group of people that are helping each other to achieve something, but right now I wouldn't be able to find a SINGLE guild that works that way.

 

PvE players go in guilds only for free bonuses.

PvP players only to abuse siege and wars (PvE as well, actually).

 

Guilds aren't united in any way as people only make as many of them as possible for the purpose of benefit and treat them as money-making machines, or as places where they can group PvP characters and war weaker players.


Edited by EdgyDalmaska (Elgore), 08 December 2019 - 12:58 PM.

"Show some humility. One day's victory is another day's defeat. REMEMBER IT!" - Shingen Takeda


#7 Ðarknight (Elgore)

Ðarknight (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Locationin the confines of the mental universe

Posted 08 December 2019 - 12:56 PM

Spoiler
A guild cannot be considered growing for four years on the same level, this is ridiculous. A growing guild is one where there are low level players or well equipped players who are recruiting other players. And a growing guild has no structure to participate in sieges. The peacemaker ability is useless in this game, when one can be immune to war and participate in siege at the same time; which contradicts the peacemaker's ability, where you are immune to wars and cannot participate in sieges, and that makes sense.
 
The truth is that anyone can form a tier 1 guild and bid on castles to prevent others from invading it, that's an abuse. At least they would have to spend their time raising the guild to level 10, and that's not hard, I was weak and I played alone in this game, I leveled a guild by myself to level 20 in the zagre cave.
 
Therefore, we must have an ability after level 10 that, instead of preventing you from participating in castles and receiving wars, you enable it to participate in PvP content.

Edited by Ðarknight (Elgore), 08 December 2019 - 12:57 PM.

  • Genius (Elgore), ChristineLeigh (Elgore), Reikkan (Elgore) and 1 other like this

#8 Ðarknight (Elgore)

Ðarknight (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Locationin the confines of the mental universe

Posted 08 December 2019 - 01:30 PM

Also, another thing related to Guilds and PvP I wanted to give some attention to while this topic is still visible are guild wars and the way people run "guilds" these days.

 

For the last, maybe 2-3 weeks, the guild I'm currently in had 4 wars. 3 of these wars has been paid off, however, one of the surrender prices was so high that the leader wasn't willing to pay for it, even with donations. So we had to wait for the option to surrender around 2 weeks after we are actually defeated. Now, the problem here is as follows:

 

Our guild consists in majority of PvE players.

The guild that declared war is in Majority PvP.

We decide to not pay for the surrender.

Enemy guild safely transfers all their PvE characters to their save guild(s) while leaving there only PvP Dark Knights and Crusaders.

Most of our PvE players now either die on bosses (and other spots), leave the guild, or not take part in the war at all.

Result in war is 67:127 because enemy's PvE players safely changed the guild so they can easily farm points on us, while we struggle to kill them even in 6v4 situations.

 

That wouldn't be a problem if PvE characters within enemy guild couldn't just "leave" like that, so both sides would have equal chance for getting kills in the war.

 

So what is the point of being in a guild if anyone can change guild anytime they wish.

There is no consequences in changing guilds all the time (except for 1m gold for the bonuses which some people even ignore because of how often they change).

And the cooldowns for joining new guilds became so short that they're completely irrelevant right now (if there are any at all).

 

Guild is supposed to be a community/group of people that are helping each other to achieve something, but right now I wouldn't be able to find a SINGLE guild that works that way.

 

PvE players go in guilds only for free bonuses.

PvP players only to abuse siege and wars (PvE as well, actually).

 

Guilds aren't united in any way as people only make as many of them as possible for the purpose of benefit and treat them as money-making machines, or as places where they can group PvP characters and war weaker players.

 I disagree with preventing players from leaving the guild in the middle of a war. These same guilds may have spies who are passing confidential information and giving points to other guilds; In that case, the leader can't cast them out either, so you don't have to be in a guild that promises PvE content and doesn't have a peacemaker to protect. This is disconcerting, like using weak players as pawns and forcing them to tolerate any stupid decision by a leader or other abusive player who insists on bothering other guilds. 

 

 I find it annoying not to be able to force a player out of the same guild in the middle of a siege. Many players ask me for a guild and I don't accept them because they were once guild members who challenged to break into the castles of my domain. I am reluctant to accept them, knowing that you can get involved in my group and prevent it from running to the gate.

 

Unfortunately it takes years for a guild to find the most trusted members and to do their utmost to help this guild grow in both PvE and PvP content. This server has few dominant guilds and many castles, which allows dominant guilds to fragment to start a new and weak guild, or use their secondary characters to invade castles; so much so that the monopolization of castles on this server exists.


Edited by Ðarknight (Elgore), 08 December 2019 - 01:37 PM.


#9 Talestra (Elgore)

Talestra (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1206 posts

Posted 08 December 2019 - 02:20 PM

Also, another thing related to Guilds and PvP I wanted to give some attention to while this topic is still visible are guild wars and the way people run "guilds" these days.

 

For the last, maybe 2-3 weeks, the guild I'm currently in had 4 wars. 3 of these wars has been paid off, however, one of the surrender prices was so high that the leader wasn't willing to pay for it, even with donations. So we had to wait for the option to surrender around 2 weeks after we are actually defeated. Now, the problem here is as follows:

 

Our guild consists in majority of PvE players.

The guild that declared war is in Majority PvP.

We decide to not pay for the surrender.

Enemy guild safely transfers all their PvE characters to their save guild(s) while leaving there only PvP Dark Knights and Crusaders.

Most of our PvE players now either die on bosses (and other spots), leave the guild, or not take part in the war at all.

Result in war is 67:127 because enemy's PvE players safely changed the guild so they can easily farm points on us, while we struggle to kill them even in 6v4 situations.

 

That wouldn't be a problem if PvE characters within enemy guild couldn't just "leave" like that, so both sides would have equal chance for getting kills in the war.

 

So what is the point of being in a guild if anyone can change guild anytime they wish.

There is no consequences in changing guilds all the time (except for 1m gold for the bonuses which some people even ignore because of how often they change).

And the cooldowns for joining new guilds became so short that they're completely irrelevant right now (if there are any at all).

 

Guild is supposed to be a community/group of people that are helping each other to achieve something, but right now I wouldn't be able to find a SINGLE guild that works that way.

 

PvE players go in guilds only for free bonuses.

PvP players only to abuse siege and wars (PvE as well, actually).

 

Guilds aren't united in any way as people only make as many of them as possible for the purpose of benefit and treat them as money-making machines, or as places where they can group PvP characters and war weaker players.

 

One quick question: why your mostly PvE guild did not choose the Peacemaker?

 

 I disagree with preventing players from leaving the guild in the middle of a war. These same guilds may have spies who are passing confidential information and giving points to other guilds; In that case, the leader can't cast them out either, so you don't have to be in a guild that promises PvE content and doesn't have a peacemaker to protect. This is disconcerting, like using weak players as pawns and forcing them to tolerate any stupid decision by a leader or other abusive player who insists on bothering other guilds. 

 

 I find it annoying not to be able to force a player out of the same guild in the middle of a siege. Many players ask me for a guild and I don't accept them because they were once guild members who challenged to break into the castles of my domain. I am reluctant to accept them, knowing that you can get involved in my group and prevent it from running to the gate.

 

Unfortunately it takes years for a guild to find the most trusted members and to do their utmost to help this guild grow in both PvE and PvP content. This server has few dominant guilds and many castles, which allows dominant guilds to fragment to start a new and weak guild, or use their secondary characters to invade castles; so much so that the monopolization of castles on this server exists.

 

The possibility to leave one guild and join another at once is indeed one of ways to abuse castle sieges. You can get a castle and then to take part in another siege, just to help some friendly guild to win. I guess you never used this feature by your character?


  • Khyaran (Elgore) and Reikkan (Elgore) like this

#10 Ðarknight (Elgore)

Ðarknight (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Locationin the confines of the mental universe

Posted 08 December 2019 - 02:42 PM

Ðarknight (Elgore), de 08 dez 2019 às 10:30, disse:snapback.png

 Eu discordo de impedir que jogadores deixem a guilda no meio de uma guerra. Essas mesmas guildas podem ter espiões que estão passando informações confidenciais e dando pontos para outras guildas; Nesse caso, o líder também não pode expulsá-los, então você não precisa estar em uma guilda que promete conteúdo PvE e não tem um pacificador para proteger. Isso é desconcertante, como usar jogadores fracos como peões e forçá-los a tolerar qualquer decisão estúpida de um líder ou outro jogador abusivo que insiste em incomodar outras guildas. 

 

 Acho irritante não poder forçar um jogador a sair da mesma guilda no meio de um cerco. Muitos jogadores me pedem uma guilda e eu não os aceito porque eles já foram membros da guilda que desafiaram a invadir os castelos do meu domínio. Estou relutante em aceitá-los, sabendo que você pode se envolver no meu grupo e impedir que ele corra para o portão.

 

Infelizmente, leva anos para que uma guilda encontre os membros mais confiáveis ​​e faça o possível para ajudar essa guilda a crescer em conteúdo PvE e PvP. Este servidor tem poucas guildas dominantes e muitos castelos, o que permite que as guildas dominantes se fragmentem para iniciar uma guilda nova e fraca, ou use seus personagens secundários para invadir castelos; tanto que existe a monopolização de castelos neste servidor.

I am not saying that people who defect from guilds should not have a higher penalty, because they should. What I said had nothing to do with higher penalties, what I said was: we should not restrict the guild user's exit when he pleases - unless you want to force him into the army ... Dictatorship in a game is no fun. kkk


  • EdgyDalmaska (Elgore) likes this

#11 EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 427 posts
  • LocationThe World.

Posted 08 December 2019 - 02:43 PM

 I disagree with preventing players from leaving the guild in the middle of a war. These same guilds may have spies who are passing confidential information and giving points to other guilds; In that case, the leader can't cast them out either, so you don't have to be in a guild that promises PvE content and doesn't have a peacemaker to protect. This is disconcerting, like using weak players as pawns and forcing them to tolerate any stupid decision by a leader or other abusive player who insists on bothering other guilds. 

 

 I find it annoying not to be able to force a player out of the same guild in the middle of a siege. Many players ask me for a guild and I don't accept them because they were once guild members who challenged to break into the castles of my domain. I am reluctant to accept them, knowing that you can get involved in my group and prevent it from running to the gate.

 

Unfortunately it takes years for a guild to find the most trusted members and to do their utmost to help this guild grow in both PvE and PvP content. This server has few dominant guilds and many castles, which allows dominant guilds to fragment to start a new and weak guild, or use their secondary characters to invade castles; so much so that the monopolization of castles on this server exists.

Agreed, unfortunately fixing one issue, creates other issues, either way.

 

One quick question: why your mostly PvE guild did not choose the Peacemaker?

Most likely because they want to try sieges and also have the guild buff for 10% defense which is very desirable by everyone as far as I know, PvEs and PvPs alike.

But it's not something to ask me, as this guild was exisiting long before I joined it, actually before I even made mine.

 

I don't want to be a pushover with suggestions, however I've been sitting in my little empty guild for a very long time now and eventually got very bored out, so I'm trying new things. If I see something that I personally view as an "issue" just want to point it out, I'm not asking for any changes.


  • ChristineLeigh (Elgore) likes this

"Show some humility. One day's victory is another day's defeat. REMEMBER IT!" - Shingen Takeda


#12 Solsagan (Elgore)

Solsagan (Elgore)

    Warden of Aura

  • Moderators
  • 2200 posts
  • LocationYour heart

Posted 08 December 2019 - 02:58 PM

It's quite simple: Castle battle and guild wars are different pvp contents in game, one is not tied to the other. 

 

Now for the issue about guilds using alt guilds to prevent other bids, this has nothing to do with the fact they're under 10 to prevent war against other guilds, they would still be doing it if they were max level or not. It's a siege system issue, one that devs didn't foresee apparently.


  • Talestra (Elgore) and Khyaran (Elgore) like this
First of his name, Lord commander of Revolt, King in the north, Warden of Aura, Protector of the realm.
- List of Elites and Bosses
- Solsagan's assassin build.
- Lastfm Profile
- Spotify Profile

#13 Ðarknight (Elgore)

Ðarknight (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 476 posts
  • Locationin the confines of the mental universe

Posted 08 December 2019 - 04:23 PM

It's not about the time needed to level a guild. If a guild is ready to besiege a castle, it will also be ready to participate in out-of-siege wars. Instead of activating a peacemaker - which we have, before level 10, we must activate a "combatant" where you can participate in all PvP content; although he is so small ...

 

This system will continue for a long time, maybe the crutches will help or a wheelchair.


Edited by Ðarknight (Elgore), 08 December 2019 - 04:28 PM.


#14 Reikkan (Elgore)

Reikkan (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 519 posts
  • LocationBright Shield

Posted 08 December 2019 - 04:41 PM

"Growing guild" argument is invalid. There are other sources of PVP in order to "test the grounds", Siege is meant to be the ultimate PVP event and growing guilds aren't going to be able to face older players anyway.

 

Peacemaker also grants the players +5% loot. Instead of removing it, i'd rather move it to Lv20 (Leader Power) talent, paired with "Combatent" suggestion, which would grant the players some PVP bonuses like DMG or Resists.

 

Lv1 guilds wouldn't be able to take part on sieges, but would be vulnerable to wars. Big disvantage to "pure" players (PVP or PVE). Same with people who don't chose Peacemaker/Combatent talents at Lv20.

 

Pure PVE guilds would aim to reach Lv20 in order to grab peacemaker and avoid wars.

 

Pure PVP guilds would aim to reach Lv20 in order to take part in sieges.

 

No one would make infinite alt guilds and level them up to 20 just to be crushed in wars if they decide to abuse siege system.

 

Problem solved.


  • ChristineLeigh (Elgore), Ðarknight (Elgore), EdgyDalmaska (Elgore) and 1 other like this

If you need a support for tanking anything, you still aren't able to tank it. 


#15 Talestra (Elgore)

Talestra (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • 1206 posts

Posted 09 December 2019 - 05:57 AM

"Growing guild" argument is invalid. There are other sources of PVP in order to "test the grounds", Siege is meant to be the ultimate PVP event and growing guilds aren't going to be able to face older players anyway.

 

Peacemaker also grants the players +5% loot. Instead of removing it, i'd rather move it to Lv20 (Leader Power) talent, paired with "Combatent" suggestion, which would grant the players some PVP bonuses like DMG or Resists.

 

Lv1 guilds wouldn't be able to take part on sieges, but would be vulnerable to wars. Big disvantage to "pure" players (PVP or PVE). Same with people who don't chose Peacemaker/Combatent talents at Lv20.

 

Pure PVE guilds would aim to reach Lv20 in order to grab peacemaker and avoid wars.

 

Pure PVP guilds would aim to reach Lv20 in order to take part in sieges.

 

No one would make infinite alt guilds and level them up to 20 just to be crushed in wars if they decide to abuse siege system.

 

Problem solved.

 

Somebody has caught cold? Let's behead him. Problem solved.

 

Or let's twist the guild concept in total just because some smart guys use low-level guilds to ruin somebody's siege bids. A bit too much imo. Honestly the first suggestion to restrict siege bidding for guilds under 10 sounds more sensible.



#16 Reikkan (Elgore)

Reikkan (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 519 posts
  • LocationBright Shield

Posted 09 December 2019 - 11:19 AM

Somebody has caught cold? Let's behead him. Problem solved.

 

Or let's twist the guild concept in total just because some smart guys use low-level guilds to ruin somebody's siege bids. A bit too much imo. Honestly the first suggestion to restrict siege bidding for guilds under 10 sounds more sensible.

 

Then buff the loot% talent and remove it from Peacemaker (or Combatent, if it were to be chosen), because my guild uses Peacemaker to farm.

 

Sometimes simple concepts aren't enough to totally solve the problem. One of the reasons I made that suggestion is to discourage people to make multiple guilds, due to the time spent leveling a guild to L20. Level 10 guilds are still something to work for, but nothing near as leveling it to 20, it won't happen in a couple of days as people expect.

 

Not only that, having to pay for 3d cooldown skills that aren't even as good to be worth makes the Leader Power line of talents completely useless. A change in that is not only welcome, but needed.  


  • EdgyDalmaska (Elgore) likes this

If you need a support for tanking anything, you still aren't able to tank it. 


#17 EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 427 posts
  • LocationThe World.

Posted 10 December 2019 - 06:35 AM

Not only that, having to pay for 3d cooldown skills that aren't even as good to be worth makes the Leader Power line of talents completely useless. A change in that is not only welcome, but needed.  

Nah, walking on some people who do Dengur or Edward and then summoning monster never gets old, even if I have to wait 3days to do it again and waste some resources it's totally worth it lol.


Edited by EdgyDalmaska (Elgore), 10 December 2019 - 06:38 AM.

"Show some humility. One day's victory is another day's defeat. REMEMBER IT!" - Shingen Takeda


#18 Mushrððm (Elgore)

Mushrððm (Elgore)

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 15 December 2019 - 11:27 PM

let me see this clearly, youre afraid of a level 9 guild get your castle ? so you want to create new rules to the game based on your fears ? You guys always want to troll newcomers, because youre always afraid of retaliation, you think nobody sees your guild have like 10 alliances, now you with your 10 alliances are afraid of level 9 guild ? xD maybe because the others level 20 guilds dont need to fight with you, they are your friend, this way you feel confortable ? No ! you still want to screw with newcomers

you really think if a guild get stronger, they will stuck on level 9 ? they are not dumb bro


Edited by Mushrððm (Elgore), 15 December 2019 - 11:59 PM.


#19 Reikkan (Elgore)

Reikkan (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 519 posts
  • LocationBright Shield

Posted 16 December 2019 - 12:20 PM

let me see this clearly, youre afraid of a level 9 guild get your castle ? so you want to create new rules to the game based on your fears ? You guys always want to troll newcomers, because youre always afraid of retaliation, you think nobody sees your guild have like 10 alliances, now you with your 10 alliances are afraid of level 9 guild ? xD maybe because the others level 20 guilds dont need to fight with you, they are your friend, this way you feel confortable ? No ! you still want to screw with newcomers

you really think if a guild get stronger, they will stuck on level 9 ? they are not dumb bro

 

I think you missed the point. 

 

The Lv9 guild is the one afraid of fighting. If they are so powerful and fearsome, why not allow it to take part on wars too?

 

If a guild has access to PVP, it should mean all PVPs and not only siege. Being immune to wars and able to take part on sieges is a huge advantage, which means people will abuse it in order to keep castles without fighting (via bidding higher than competing guilds). What we will have is a bunch of Lv9 guilds bidding 10m per castle and a even more dead PVP scenario on our server.


  • Ðarknight (Elgore) likes this

If you need a support for tanking anything, you still aren't able to tank it. 


#20 EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

EdgyDalmaska (Elgore)

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 427 posts
  • LocationThe World.

Posted 16 December 2019 - 04:30 PM

The source of the problem is that there can be only 2 bids at the same time. Keep the idea of 1 guild being able to have 1 castle, just allow everyone else to participate again; that would be the best solution since bidding low-level guild wouldn't guarantee safety anymore.


  • Reikkan (Elgore) and Ðarknight (Elgore) like this

"Show some humility. One day's victory is another day's defeat. REMEMBER IT!" - Shingen Takeda






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Castle, Bid, Guild, PvP

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users