Beautiful Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 A few months ago there was a patch that stated after 2 weeks if 2.0 hasnt been broken and changed hands ( different guild ) that it will be taken from the guild and GMS will have it and then its a free for all. id like this to be reimplimented. i noticed that 2.0 besides the guild that holds it its kind of the least populated woe. i think if they did the castle exchange again it might push players to want to woe.
Nadtorious Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 I thought its still on, has it been taken off? If so... +1.
gildartz Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 i dont know about that rule but i agree. In my case, i don't woe during Sat(here in my country) because its pointless to go against 20+ players when u only have like 3-4 guildmates on. Changing hands will encourage other players to attend woe 2.0.
Beautiful Posted October 19, 2012 Author Report Posted October 19, 2012 http://www.forsaken-ro.net/forum/index.php?showtopic=21697 read it and it stays "We have rest ownership of the WoE 2.0 map because it hasn't changed hands in a while!" notice it says hasnt changed hands in a while. they use to do it after every 2 weeks but stopped for an odd reason.
Veracity Posted October 19, 2012 Report Posted October 19, 2012 What about modifying WoE 2.0 to make it more competitive? As it stands, I think the defense may not be right for our server to promote the most competition. Perhaps we should make it easier to take (to a reasonable extent, of course) and then we wouldn't really need to take the castle back.
Boklek Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 i think it is still implemented. i just had been broken. but they have stole it again int he last minute again
Leo `D Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 It has been implemented now it was just being break and taken over again, I think when it break once it 2 Weeks period time will reset, and Btw the castle defenses is Weak no not like the old days :D
Beautiful Posted October 20, 2012 Author Report Posted October 20, 2012 What about modifying WoE 2.0 to make it more competitive? As it stands, I think the defense may not be right for our server to promote the most competition. Perhaps we should make it easier to take (to a reasonable extent, of course) and then we wouldn't really need to take the castle back.i will be honest. as much as i enjoy woe. this is the least favorite. for American and Euro the fact that they are easy to rush makes that woe a really fast paced woe. 2.0 pretty much emphasises on being a defending oriented woe. the ammount of things you have to break reguardless of how much HP and how many Barricades you need to break is alot. 2 stones + i believe 2 or 3 sets of barricades? and then an emp? its alot to do for such a small ammount. if everyone participated in 2.0 like they participate in Normal WoE then i wouldnt of really brought this up. but the fact its the most quiet. woe. i asked around a bunch of players and a good amount state " Its to hard to really break or get it " the 2.0 is still under Beta since its an iffy woe. Over the last few woes. its stayed at 1 guild being the top dominator in 2.0 and yeah it breaks once or twice but thats it? 100% eco - 5 ecos per break that leaves you with around 90% depending on how many breaks it doesnt really make a difference. im not saying to just say fuck 2.0 but make it a fair trade cause at this point its not even worth attempting to woe 2
coffee break Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 i will be honest. as much as i enjoy woe. this is the least favorite. for American and Euro the fact that they are easy to rush makes that woe a really fast paced woe. 2.0 pretty much emphasises on being a defending oriented woe. the ammount of things you have to break reguardless of how much HP and how many Barricades you need to break is alot. 2 stones + i believe 2 or 3 sets of barricades? and then an emp? its alot to do for such a small ammount. if everyone participated in 2.0 like they participate in Normal WoE then i wouldnt of really brought this up. but the fact its the most quiet. woe. i asked around a bunch of players and a good amount state " Its to hard to really break or get it " the 2.0 is still under Beta since its an iffy woe. Over the last few woes. its stayed at 1 guild being the top dominator in 2.0 and yeah it breaks once or twice but thats it? 100% eco - 5 ecos per break that leaves you with around 90% depending on how many breaks it doesnt really make a difference. im not saying to just say fuck 2.0 but make it a fair trade cause at this point its not even worth attempting to woe The most quite woe...I agree with you O.O base on my observations.
Amicable Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 i will be honest. as much as i enjoy woe. this is the least favorite. for American and Euro the fact that they are easy to rush makes that woe a really fast paced woe. 2.0 pretty much emphasises on being a defending oriented woe. the ammount of things you have to break reguardless of how much HP and how many Barricades you need to break is alot. 2 stones + i believe 2 or 3 sets of barricades? and then an emp? its alot to do for such a small ammount. if everyone participated in 2.0 like they participate in Normal WoE then i wouldnt of really brought this up. but the fact its the most quiet. woe. i asked around a bunch of players and a good amount state " Its to hard to really break or get it " the 2.0 is still under Beta since its an iffy woe. Over the last few woes. its stayed at 1 guild being the top dominator in 2.0 and yeah it breaks once or twice but thats it? 100% eco - 5 ecos per break that leaves you with around 90% depending on how many breaks it doesnt really make a difference. im not saying to just say fuck 2.0 but make it a fair trade cause at this point its not even worth attempting to woe Agreed, I mean I have tried woeing for 2.0, but with the guild having a strong defense, it just takes forever to break 1 stone.....>.> So in the end its like only 3 breaks.....and the ecos is still high :( +1 to the suggestion :)
Celestial Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 This is getting way overboard now. CresentChaos please stop spamming every topic on forums with only few or one word. You're overflooding other topics. 1
coffee break Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 thank u Celestial lol i don't get it. gosh! sorry.. im just curious..XD
Perishable Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 My suggestion is that WoE 2.0 should last 2 hours.
Boklek Posted October 20, 2012 Report Posted October 20, 2012 (edited) i have a question. why you didn't suggest it before when the motto has it. DO you have an issue with the castle holder? Compare to motto's defense. the defense of osfa is nothing. and that time there is a breakneck. so what's your problem with osfa? just being owned by nood players is hard to accept? and for the GM that will reviewed it. DON'T BE BIAS PLEASE. Edited October 21, 2012 by Boklek
Monaco96 Posted October 21, 2012 Report Posted October 21, 2012 (edited) LOL..i think almost ppl in osfa not nub,they have more pro player and when osfa defense to hard for survive cuz osfa have 20 or more player online..^_^ #Hope u guys understand my english,cuz my english sux T_T Edited October 21, 2012 by Monaco96
pukamon Posted October 21, 2012 Report Posted October 21, 2012 +1 with the re-implementation of 2 week ownership then break (or 2+ weeks), anything else than that like reducing the hp of the barricades and stones is just a no for me. (Sorry GMs more job for you guys). Or how about increasing the time delay on fixing the barricades and stones instead. Or can't the time the woe 2.0 is held just be changed instead, it's not that less people are playing 2.0 at first because its defense is hard(barricades/stones too much hp etc...), it is because there's really not that many people logged on during this time of woe which makes it hard for the opposing players (not enough manpower to break through) which leads to those players getting discouraged on playing at 2.0 which leads people to think that 2.0 defenses are OP. If placed in a better time slot we may get more players participating in 2.0(Like U.S. woe time). This woe is supposed to be more about defense isn't it? If it keeps breaking all the time then its just gonna be the same as other woes. So since the castle is not breaking all the time should be a good thing, but of course if the castle doesn't break for a long time then the GM breaking rule should be done. It was the same situation before when different guilds had it, A guild held the castle for weeks so a couple of adjustments were made(HP of barricades and stones), after this the guild was still able to hold it for weeks until the 2 week rule was implemented. TL;DR : Change time slot of 2.0 to a better time to get more players to participate in 2.0
Beautiful Posted October 21, 2012 Author Report Posted October 21, 2012 i have a question. why you didn't suggest it before when the motto has it. DO you have an issue with the castle holder? Compare to motto's defense. the defense of osfa is nothing. and that time there is a breakneck. so what's your problem with osfa? just being owned by nood players is hard to accept? and for the GM that will reviewed it. DON'T BE BIAS PLEASE. i have a question as well. why are you bias? the reason i never brought it up with motto was because it was till implimented. Dignified and Motto/Terrorize had the castle taken every 2 weeks. i dont care for defense if u wanna keep the defense at a zillion hp i dont care. what i am looking for is Consistency. if you take it away from guilds for 5 months and then randomly stop then it has no effect. same thing as banning players. if you ban 1 account for selling items for real money then you ban all accounts asociated you dont half ass and only do 1. you fix the problem. cause all i am seeing is players saying " Oh Biased this is my guild i will do whatever it is to make this guild work " +1 with the re-implementation of 2 week ownership then break (or 2+ weeks), anything else than that like reducing the hp of the barricades and stones is just a no for me. (Sorry GMs more job for you guys). Or how about increasing the time delay on fixing the barricades and stones instead. Or can't the time the woe 2.0 is held just be changed instead, it's not that less people are playing 2.0 at first because its defense is hard(barricades/stones too much hp etc...), it is because there's really not that many people logged on during this time of woe which makes it hard for the opposing players (not enough manpower to break through) which leads to those players getting discouraged on playing at 2.0 which leads people to think that 2.0 defenses are OP. If placed in a better time slot we may get more players participating in 2.0(Like U.S. woe time). This woe is supposed to be more about defense isn't it? If it keeps breaking all the time then its just gonna be the same as other woes. So since the castle is not breaking all the time should be a good thing, but of course if the castle doesn't break for a long time then the GM breaking rule should be done. It was the same situation before when different guilds had it, A guild held the castle for weeks so a couple of adjustments were made(HP of barricades and stones), after this the guild was still able to hold it for weeks until the 2 week rule was implemented. TL;DR : Change time slot of 2.0 to a better time to get more players to participate in 2.0 Yes timing is a factor in this woe. if it was at a different time then there may be more challenge during woe. and exactly this woe is to encourage the defensive strat. i like the thought of having a bunch of friends defend the castle. all i can say is Veracity said there maybe a few tweeks could be made. and thats true its beta not everything is perfect but if we leave the castle as is then nothing will change. try to better the server not better your guilds and selves :) PS Older players understand more because we have seen the server in all stages empty,full,semi full.
thePast Posted October 21, 2012 Report Posted October 21, 2012 So basically the point of the suggestion is that you every Guild can only hold the WoE 2.0 Castle for 2 weeks streak, if more than that, the current guild which is holding the castle should be abandoned?
