Take my 152 Controller...Please!
This thread started many days ago. Wow, many LCAs have been won and lost during that time. And we all have had new experiences in Land Control conflicts. I wonder if these experiences have changed anyones views. They have mine.
I have always been against Cz's initial proposal for this thread. Now, I'm pretty sure that any changes to the current rules need to be delayed. Why? Because everthing is still new and until we play for a month or two, it is really difficult to see what is fun about the current rules and what is not fun. For example: I was initially dismayed that it appeared so difficult to defend LCAs. Now, I am almost relieved that we lost some LCAs. Defending multiple towers (each for 6 hours a day) could drive a person insane. [Hence the obscure humor in the title of this reply.]
Further, I'm wondering if it won't be more fun, in the long run, to enjoy the ebb and flow of tower destruction and creation, rather than trying to bend the rules into a form that allows me to more easily hold a given area. I have come to realize that if I hold, for example, my 152 lvl tower that is 25% during my normal playing times (evenings), people in other time zones in my guild of my level may not be able to enjoy NW in the same way I am.
Bases get destroyed, people form attack forces, liberate an area, put up controllers, hold them for a few days...and they fall. Maybe that is for the best.
In the long run, I predict that we will find it is very difficult for even the strongest Orgs to hold 5 LCAs constantly. So, my second-tier guild (just below Uber, I like to think...hehe) will likely have to settle for a few LCAs standing at any point in time.
What I have seen is that the fun is in attacking, since everyone can participate regardless of the times they play and regardless of their level. Somewhere, some base is going 25%, and if you are determined you can find or recruit an attack force.
People are enjoying this!
Now for the important main issues raised in this thread. I think they boil down to:
1) 150 PvP range limit: This is an oddity that is extremely frustrating especially for those just above 150. The weirdness of being level 151, putting up a level 150 tower and not being able to defend it against more than half the attackers is bizarre. How can this be fixed?
2) The PvP border issues. I am not a PvP specialist, but from reading the Forums, these issues have existed from the beginning of AO. People run out of the PvP area and get buffed. People get buffed by those outside the battle. If these issues were easily fixed, they would have been fixed already. I am absolutely against creating some artificial limits that only apply to LCA PvP. At least I am right now. We shouldn't jump the gun until we play for several more weeks.
So, have anyone's ideas changed? Have I missed the mark on the important issues?
So, is the Current Situation Good?
Snublefot writes:
"The typical org got toons of all level ranges. The typical org do not have enough players in any level range to successfully attack or defend any tower with the change outlined by Cz. "
Hmmm, how is everyone doing with things as they are?
I was looking at http://www.ymera.com (thanks for the link, Snub). It seems to me that CURRENTLY only the top 50 or so orgs stand much of a chance at attacking or defending a Control Tower of any level. I'm assuming here that an org with 100 listed chars will have a hard time mustering a force of 30 at any particular time (particularly defending!). With 10 chars in the controller/tower attack range and support by 20 chars, there is a reasonable chance for success. This is pretty much true for defending too. Of course situations vary. This is only a rough estimate to explain the logic behind my statement.
So, is that a good thing? Lets see, 50 orgs time 5 possible LCAs = 250 pieces of land that might be absorbed by the largest orgs. How many LCAs are there? Uh, roughly 27 zones times 8 (a rough average from glancing at the LCA status map) = 216
I would argue that if we make Defending too easy, all the top Orgs will have 5 LCAs and there will be little, if any, for the other two-thirds of the players. Not good. Plus it will discourage attacking, which is the main fun of NW for all levels and playtimes anyway.
The way things currently stand, and adding the 'dormant' LCAs to the equations it might look like this:
50 Orgs times 4 LCAs (maybe a little high) = 200 LCAs controlled by the top orgs
27 Zones time 10 LCA (a guess at the new LCAs) = 270 LCAs total
So, leaving things as they are, and not increasing the ease of defense will likely allow at least 70 LCAs that won't be gobbled up by the top orgs. That's not too bad. But it seems pretty low still. So, I have to say I kind of like the way things are headed. No changes appear to be needed.
Hey, Snub...
I didn't mean to imply that all of your posts are hot-headed or poorly worded. They aren't. Your writing is good. Your posts are valuable. That is one reason I pointed out that I am less likely to take the time to read your thoughts if you begin with a cheap shot and then follow with LARGE BOLD LETTERS. Hey, that has RANT written all over it.
You are passionate, and that is wonderful. I myself am guilty of being hot-headed on occasion, so I don't hold it against anyone.
Orgs with High-levels the only CLA ownsers?
Warlock,
Here is a tough job for you, or someone. I'd like to know if any CLAs are currently owned by smallish orgs. Or, if any orgs without significant high-levels own LCAs
Is there any easy way to check this? Or does it involve phsyically checking each base in game?
Of course the levels in any Org don't necessarily tell us anything about who is defending, or who hleped destroy the previous tower, but it would tell us if any smallish clans have CLAs. If they don't, then we have a problem.
If Clan is attacking Clan, then this should stop,, IMHO. Warlock, if you see this happening, you might notify a CoA allegiance member, since I was informed that they will defend any and all Clan CLAs, even if the attackers are Clan. (Of course if the Clan being attacked is already on the CoA 'blacklist' this may be an exception.)
Re: Orgs with High-levels the only CLA ownsers?
Quote:
Originally posted by Typothetae
If Clan is attacking Clan, then this should stop,, IMHO. Warlock, if you see this happening, you might notify a CoA allegiance member, since I was informed that they will defend any and all Clan CLAs, even if the attackers are Clan. (Of course if the Clan being attacked is already on the CoA 'blacklist' this may be an exception.)
Why should it stop? (not that I'm for or against stopping it) Thats what the 5% is for. I'll agree its not desirable, but unfortunately thats the only option available to low level players since they will never be able to make it to their 'opposite numbers' low level zone.
Also given that there isnt enough land for everyone this mechanism (intra-faction) is needed to give everyone a fair chance at land control.