Jasper Wrote:mahawirasd Wrote:Astroboi Wrote:Please find a valid point other than "If a guild comes to a domination standard , then they can own 2 castle, increasing their wealth limit." which is a disguised "I don't even like WoE, I just want to reap easy rewards and If something changes I will lose my easy revenue." WoE is war, the strongest guild wins. Suck it up.*
then perhaps one should read one's word first before posting... Perhaps one should prove that one COULD take alde to show one's strength before telling the ones who lost the castle to suck it up...
(...)
Street bro, again, sorry but your being outnumbered isn't anyone's fault but yourself. IF you want alde, then don't do trans WOE, dedicate yourself to alde. If you feel undermanned to go against STD and apoc and behe, why don't just go against BS? I'm sure you won't be the undermanned side in that fight if you dedicate all your personnel there...
Aaronock, i agree with your view on the situation. There is a lack of interest, but whose fault is it?
Must majority rule always steer a p-server?
funny thing is, if all the people who posted here talking like they give a damn actually went up against Alde together, i'm pretty sure you guys can give BS a run for their money. But why are you guys just talking here and not really channeling all that energy to conquer alde, keep it for a few months, show that you can dominate, and THEN say to the GM's "hey, alde is too easy for us to keep, we feel like we're abusing it, so what say we relinquish control of this castle so that you guys can move it to another day so that other people may compete and we'll have more fun?"
-w-
I think youre missing the point....
I totally remember when LW held the Pront's castle economy to 100. They did take Alde after (few WoE after) they lost their Pront castle, just to prove how easy it was to keep it. They kept it for 4 WoE and then quit because it wasn't worth their time.
If a guild can hold a trans castle to 100, I don't see how the same guild can not end-up holding the non-trans castle in the same time with different schedule. Of course changing the schedule will bring more people to Alde. I won't deny it.
I also totally remember the whining about LW holding the eco to 100 over a long period of time. GM's just turned around and claimed "hey, it's the game as is, it's not our job to do something against it, they're not cheating". Now Bamboo hold Alde to it's max eco (20) for a long period of time without anyone trying to take it seriously (since a short time, we got some serious guild to defend from here and there, just like Guillermo's side guild). Now you're asking out of the game to make this case be threatened differently.
If WoE is split-up, lets says wednesday non-trans and sunday trans, then we might even see a need to open a 2nd non-trans castle. And if Bamboo is pushed to trans WoE that way on the sundays, then there might be a need for a 3rd trans castle.
Now's a brand new proposal
Lots of people claim that they don't have a quick team readied to take Alde on the basis they have to choose what type of WoE they do.
I've heard a lot of ideas suggested, but not this one.
Solution involes:
+ Prontera, Payon and Aldebaran switch to sunday WoE only.
+ Open a brand new Castle for non-trans wednesday, with an incitative limit of eco in between 50 to 100.
Effects expected:
* Incitate players to raise-up competitive non-trans characters. Thereafter solves the issue players aren't readied to attack Alde.
* Doesn't steal Bamboo's non-trans castle with
out of game manoeuvers.
* Doesn't implement even more hours of WoE. I know for some players 3 is too much, and for some, 3 isn't enough.
