Loser34 Posted May 3, 2008 Report Posted May 3, 2008 OMG, y is there only 1 castle to take in WOE, when there should be 25.. explain and if u can plz change ti to 25 castles(be so much fun)
Sensation Posted May 3, 2008 Report Posted May 3, 2008 Because there is no guild so far who can defend 1 castle yet, this is why there is no reason to open more.
Terroryst Posted May 3, 2008 Report Posted May 3, 2008 We tried 2 castles. Influence owned one, and nobody could get it from them due to the map structure. One castle is good enough, and most castles can't even hold the castle anymore. WoE is basically all about how fast you can get there, soon you're going to see Star Gladiators everywhere.
L I N K Posted May 3, 2008 Report Posted May 3, 2008 My star knight roams if the guild has a linker for Union.
Dave Posted May 3, 2008 Report Posted May 3, 2008 Yeah there needs to be more castles for WoE 1 castle is boring.Im sure there is a few guild that would WoE if there was more than one caslte to take.
Dr. Tran Posted May 3, 2008 Report Posted May 3, 2008 psh my star knight took a castle less than 45 sec, when the high jump was enable in the castle. walkin w/ str knight doesn't work xD especially i have like 90k hp >_>
Loser34 Posted May 3, 2008 Author Report Posted May 3, 2008 No one cna defend a castle becasue the castle has almsot no hp should make it take like 7 mins to kill it
jakiss Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 the emps were buffed recently they have 40mill hp now
nao-chann Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 For me,1 castle is good,Coz If there`s a 1 castle only You`re defending will be challenging and all guild will focus i nthe one castle so it`s Fun.
GSE Zombie Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 dude i have asin build that can break a emp in 5 seconds literally
NiDo Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 wow a sin x that break a emp on 5seconds wow nice, i do 32767 normal attack( double damage 34-38k) and i cant break the emp in 10seconds. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Dave Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 One castle is crap,woe is crap with one castle there needs to be more choice in what castle you can attack,the guilds now works as a team so they can share the woe drops and monopolize them between themselves.
LordAbsinth Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 1 castle per woe is ok actually,,, population is 150~200 ppl online, so 3 guilds (considering 65\70 ppl for each),,,increasing the number of it is like make become the woe a touch the flag event: SUPER BORING THING,,, ._." the problem is the woe time,,,but Genesis is already workin on it, so the european woe time will be avaible soon,,,for a total number of 3 woe per week,,,so,,, LordAbsinth
Blaze Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 listen, its one castle because nobody can defend a castle whilst trying to take over another, if you dont like the 1 castle then dont bother WoEing
Dave Posted May 4, 2008 Report Posted May 4, 2008 So the reason for having one caslte is no1 can defend while attacking,i mean that is so stupid,why cant you split your guild if you want to att another caslte?,i have woed on lots of servers and have known guilds be able to defend and attack at the same time,you run the risk of losing your castle sure but thats woe if you gonna be greedy and try to take every castle you deserve to lose what you have.
• Bloody Titans™ • Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 1 castle is fine and besides the population of fRO is not yet much more maybe when players are like 500 - 1k player maybe they will open more agits for WoE..........
Terroryst Posted May 5, 2008 Report Posted May 5, 2008 Look, we complained about not having enough castles already. We got an extra one, and then we complained about that too. So let's not bring something back from the dead. We COULD do it when we get more people.
Emy Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I hear what Dave is saying. My suggestion for that is a guild needs to choose one castle and stick with it until they're strong enough to split themselves. There's that saying: Can't have your cake and eat it too. On the other hand, one castle is more of a challenge, but for starting guilds is frustrating to participate in. I wasn't around when the server had two castles open Honestly, the amount of castles on a server depends on the guilds and the ppl playing and how they woe. I say we experiment again, now that we have more ppl as well.
L2Aim Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 No fun, I was defending payon alone for 45 minutes before. Prontera castle is much harder, let everyone of us advance in defending that one. We're slowly increasing in numbers, but those new people need to gear up. I'd say give it a month or 2, then look back at this suggestion.
Lina Posted May 6, 2008 Report Posted May 6, 2008 I think it's good to see peoples opinions.. and it'd be great to see more names up than just one having one castle.. :) But you guys raise a good point.. the server just isn't big enough to hold full blown WoE without one guild having like 10 castles.. then every guild tha thas at least a little bit of power would have one too.
Terminus Posted May 7, 2008 Report Posted May 7, 2008 When one guild manages to take the castle and keep it for 5 WoEs in a row. Then you're ready to have a second castle.
L2Aim Posted May 7, 2008 Report Posted May 7, 2008 When one guild manages to take the castle and keep it for 5 WoEs in a row. Then you're ready to have a second castle. Amen, I'm totally thinking the same.
Clasian Posted May 10, 2008 Report Posted May 10, 2008 In my opinion, opening all the castles would be better, because it increases the killing of emps, which makes it so much more fun. Though in terms of defense, most people sit in one castle for like the whole WoE and not do anything if it was 25 castles. Thats the main Problem.
