Why is Alde/Nontrans Castles There?

[Pistis_Sophia]

Nidsrule Wrote:This is a summary of the discussion that has taken place between the original Alde Woe Discussion thread and the related poll. I'll present the proposed courses of action along with the "For" and "Against" arguments for each; there won't be any discussion about rebuttals for the aforementioned arguments as that would make things messy. Let me know if any of the points come across as being biased and I'll try to word them differently if need be.

The "Issue"

The original thread started off as discussion on what role Alde WoE fills within heRO's community and more so, the complaint that Alde Woe doesn't seem to fill this role. There was a brief discussion about whether Alde WoE served a purpose as a way for new players to the server to be introduced to the WoE environment or if it was intended to be a place for players to relive the concept of retro WoE. The conclusion was made that Alde was designed to fill the later role.

This sparked discussion of changing Alde WoE so that it has it's own time slot, allowing all guilds to be able to participate in both trans and Alde WoEs.

Proposed Solutions

• Leave Alde WoE as it is (or possibly change the econ mechanics)
• Give Alde WoE it's own time slot, with changes made to the econ mechanics to balance it out.
• Get rid of Alde WoE entirely.
• Get rid of econ/castle drops from Alde Woe.
  

The two most popular choices at this stage are between leaving it as it is or giving it it's own time slot.

Leaving Alde WoE as it is

Pretty straightforward. Alde WoE would continue to run alongside trans WoE with possible changes made to the econ system. So far there have been suggestions to either raise the econ limit of Alde to attract more interest from the other guilds or to remove god items from the Alde chests along with a restructuring of the other drops to make up for their removal.

Proposal to leave Alde as it is.

For:

• An increase of econ would promote more competition in Alde due to boosted incentive to attend.
• Removing the god items would invalidate part of the original argument that Alde WoE should be removed/given it's own time slot, which claimed that Alde is an easy source of items due to lack of competition.
• Requires the least amount of effort in terms of "fixing" Alde WoE.
  

Against:

• Increasing the econ limit wouldn't address the original argument that Alde is an easy source of econ (compared to trans WoE) and it is only speculation and not factual that increasing the econ limit would increase competition in Alde.
• As it is currently implemented, Alde WoE doesn't allow all guilds a fair go at retro WoE as their attention is divided by trans WoE being held at the same time as retro WoE.
• Even with the removal of god item pieces from Alde treasure boxes, the issue remains that Alde is an easy source of castle loots compared to trans WoE castles, due to a lack of competition.
  

Giving Alde WoE it's own time slot

Alde WoE would be moved to another time slot, separating it from trans WoE. The econ mechanics and castle drops would be adjusted (if deemed necessary) so that while there would be incentive to hold Alde, the drops from trans castles would be much more favorable. God item pieces could be removed from Alde chests as it seems more fitting for them to be trans WoE only drops.

Proposal to give Alde its own time slot.

For:

• Giving Alde it's own time slot would allow all guilds that usually participate in WoE an opportunity to participate in both trans and retro WoE, without one getting in the way of the other (as is the case with how it is currently implemented).
• The server could officially advertise retro WoE as a standalone feature (once again, the current implementation causes trans WoE to completely overshadow retro WoE).
• The drops could be modified so that they aren't seen as being broken by focusing more on dropping supplies used for trans WoE instead of only gears, if necessary.
• Competition in both trans and retro WoEs would increase due to focusing the WoE community into a smaller number of castles.
  

Against:

• It gives the opportunity for one guild to dominate both trans and retro WoEs, allowing said guild to amass a greater amount of econ than they would otherwise be able to control with the way Alde Woe is currently implemented.
• It is a choice whether a guild participates in retro and/or trans WoE. The system shouldn't be changed just because the bigger guilds don't have the players to do both at once.
• Hardest proposal to implement.
  

Removing econ from Alde castle

Alde WoE would be left to run alongside trans WoE as it is currently implemented but the econ system would be removed.

For:

• People would still be able to participate in retro WoE but it would no longer provide easy econ due to lack of competition.
• Easy to implement.
  

Against:

• Lack of rewards would essentially make it a waste of time. It would essentially become a non trans version of the GvG arena with WoE mechanics.
  

Removing retro WoE completely

Self-explanatory. Retro WoE would be removed completely and everyone would be forced to participate in trans WoE only.

For:

• Easy to implement.
• Solves the issue that some claim that Alde is easy econ compared to trans WoE.
  

Against:

• Retro WoE would no longer be a feature, which there seems to be a fairly strong interest in. It has the potential to attract players who prefer non trans mechanics over trans WoE and it would be a waste to merely throw away that potential.
  

Let me know if I have missed anything.

It seems to be complete.

Though I still don't agree that big guilds have to separate to do both WoE in same time. If everyone logs their non-trans there are no guild splitting. It is like if you told me "ok we can't affroy to attack Pront and Payon in same time" OF COURSE YOU CAN'T but when you choose to attack one, you all go for that one. Why don't you do it for non-trans castle?

[Yuriohs]

Pistis_Sophia Wrote:

Nidsrule Wrote:This is a summary of the discussion that has taken place between the original Alde Woe Discussion thread and the related poll. I'll present the proposed courses of action along with the "For" and "Against" arguments for each; there won't be any discussion about rebuttals for the aforementioned arguments as that would make things messy. Let me know if any of the points come across as being biased and I'll try to word them differently if need be.

The "Issue"

The original thread started off as discussion on what role Alde WoE fills within heRO's community and more so, the complaint that Alde Woe doesn't seem to fill this role. There was a brief discussion about whether Alde WoE served a purpose as a way for new players to the server to be introduced to the WoE environment or if it was intended to be a place for players to relive the concept of retro WoE. The conclusion was made that Alde was designed to fill the later role.

This sparked discussion of changing Alde WoE so that it has it's own time slot, allowing all guilds to be able to participate in both trans and Alde WoEs.

Proposed Solutions

• Leave Alde WoE as it is (or possibly change the econ mechanics)
• Give Alde WoE it's own time slot, with changes made to the econ mechanics to balance it out.
• Get rid of Alde WoE entirely.
• Get rid of econ/castle drops from Alde Woe.
  

The two most popular choices at this stage are between leaving it as it is or giving it it's own time slot.

Leaving Alde WoE as it is

Pretty straightforward. Alde WoE would continue to run alongside trans WoE with possible changes made to the econ system. So far there have been suggestions to either raise the econ limit of Alde to attract more interest from the other guilds or to remove god items from the Alde chests along with a restructuring of the other drops to make up for their removal.

Proposal to leave Alde as it is.

For:

• An increase of econ would promote more competition in Alde due to boosted incentive to attend.
• Removing the god items would invalidate part of the original argument that Alde WoE should be removed/given it's own time slot, which claimed that Alde is an easy source of items due to lack of competition.
• Requires the least amount of effort in terms of "fixing" Alde WoE.
  

Against:

• Increasing the econ limit wouldn't address the original argument that Alde is an easy source of econ (compared to trans WoE) and it is only speculation and not factual that increasing the econ limit would increase competition in Alde.
• As it is currently implemented, Alde WoE doesn't allow all guilds a fair go at retro WoE as their attention is divided by trans WoE being held at the same time as retro WoE.
• Even with the removal of god item pieces from Alde treasure boxes, the issue remains that Alde is an easy source of castle loots compared to trans WoE castles, due to a lack of competition.
  

Giving Alde WoE it's own time slot

Alde WoE would be moved to another time slot, separating it from trans WoE. The econ mechanics and castle drops would be adjusted (if deemed necessary) so that while there would be incentive to hold Alde, the drops from trans castles would be much more favorable. God item pieces could be removed from Alde chests as it seems more fitting for them to be trans WoE only drops.

Proposal to give Alde its own time slot.

For:

• Giving Alde it's own time slot would allow all guilds that usually participate in WoE an opportunity to participate in both trans and retro WoE, without one getting in the way of the other (as is the case with how it is currently implemented).
• The server could officially advertise retro WoE as a standalone feature (once again, the current implementation causes trans WoE to completely overshadow retro WoE).
• The drops could be modified so that they aren't seen as being broken by focusing more on dropping supplies used for trans WoE instead of only gears, if necessary.
• Competition in both trans and retro WoEs would increase due to focusing the WoE community into a smaller number of castles.
  

Against:

• It gives the opportunity for one guild to dominate both trans and retro WoEs, allowing said guild to amass a greater amount of econ than they would otherwise be able to control with the way Alde Woe is currently implemented.
• It is a choice whether a guild participates in retro and/or trans WoE. The system shouldn't be changed just because the bigger guilds don't have the players to do both at once.
• Hardest proposal to implement.
  

Removing econ from Alde castle

Alde WoE would be left to run alongside trans WoE as it is currently implemented but the econ system would be removed.

For:

• People would still be able to participate in retro WoE but it would no longer provide easy econ due to lack of competition.
• Easy to implement.
  

Against:

• Lack of rewards would essentially make it a waste of time. It would essentially become a non trans version of the GvG arena with WoE mechanics.
  

Removing retro WoE completely

Self-explanatory. Retro WoE would be removed completely and everyone would be forced to participate in trans WoE only.

For:

• Easy to implement.
• Solves the issue that some claim that Alde is easy econ compared to trans WoE.
  

Against:

• Retro WoE would no longer be a feature, which there seems to be a fairly strong interest in. It has the potential to attract players who prefer non trans mechanics over trans WoE and it would be a waste to merely throw away that potential.
  

Let me know if I have missed anything.

It seems to be complete.

Though I still don't agree that big guilds have to separate to do both WoE in same time. If everyone logs their non-trans there are no guild splitting. It is like if you told me "ok we can't affroy to attack Pront and Payon in same time" OF COURSE YOU CAN'T but when you choose to attack one, you all go for that one. Why don't you do it for non-trans castle?

Because its not worth the time/trouble.
I usually send nontrans people that are bored to alde, see what they can do.

Didn't do it this WoE though, needed everyone.

Yea, Nids Beat me to laying out what happened.
Good job though nids.

[Nidsrule]

Because its not a simple case of just waltzing from trans WoE into Alde. People need to gear another char, most likely needing to transfer gears from their trans char to their non trans alt. Then if their guild needs them back in trans WoE, it's not a simple case of recalling them back, they need swap gears/chars again. Basically it messes with the flow WoE.

The whole concept of splitting your force between castles falls apart if you dont have the means to reassemble your force through recalling them. Sure, you'll recall all of the non trans alts, but they won't be anywhere near as useful as their trans mains.

EDIT: Is there any reason to quote the whole summary?

[Nyalyn]

New timeslot, please. It's the only choice that doesn't piss off either party, so I don't see how this is even a matter of debate anymore.

[Pistis_Sophia]

Yuriohs Wrote:Because its not worth the time/trouble.
I usually send nontrans people that are bored to alde, see what they can do.

Didn't do it this WoE though, needed everyone.

Yea, Nids Beat me to laying out what happened.
Good job though nids.

.

Nidsrule Wrote:Because its not a simple case of just waltzing from trans WoE into Alde. People need to gear another char, most likely needing to transfer gears from their trans char to their non trans alt. Then if their guild needs them back in trans WoE, it's not a simple case of recalling them back, they need swap gears/chars again. Basically it messes with the flow WoE.

The whole concept of splitting your force between castles falls apart if you dont have the means to reassemble your force through recalling them. Sure, you'll recall all of the non trans alts, but they won't be anywhere near as useful as their trans mains.

EDIT: Is there any reason to quote the whole summary?

If you dont own a catle, why would you need to suddently recall as a strategy?

And if you own a castle, why bother gearing to attack non-trans castle leaving your castle defenseless?

Edited: You now have 12 character slots. Don't tell me you need to transfert accounts to use the same gear pattern on your non-trans.

[Nidsrule]

Pistis_Sophia Wrote:If you dont own a catle, why would you need to suddently recall as a strategy?

And if you own a castle, why bother gearing to attack non-trans castle leaving your castle defenseless?

We are talking about a case where a guild holds one castle and sends part of its force off to attack alde on the side. If they suddenly have a large scale attack on their other castle then of course the guild is going to recall to defend. What other scenario would call for a guild to split its forces?

Of course a guild isn't going to leave it's castle defenseless. That's where the argument that guilds should split their force between alde and trans WoE falls apart. There is a decent balance with trans WoE at this stage and if one guild were to attempt to split its forces between trans and non trans WoE, this balance falls apart and said guild essentially shoots itself in the foot. That's the problem so many people have with the way Alde is setup at this stage. Giving Alde it's own time slot solves that issue.

EDIT: Even with the increased char limit (which really doesn't affect anything since people only require 2 chars to go between trans and non trans WoE) people cant seamlessly go between trans and non trans WoE as both characters will be useless in the wrong situation (trans cant enter alde, non trans serves next to no purpose in trans WoE).

[The Legendary Joe]

Pistis_Sophia Wrote:Edited: You now have 12 character slots. Don't tell me you need to transfert accounts to use the same gear pattern on your non-trans.

There are some idiots like me who have like 4+ Accounts from even before the update that switched it from 9 characters per account to 12 chars. Most of these accounts have fairly high level non-trans chars that I could use if I chose to,

[Nyalyn]

Nidsrule Wrote:non trans serves next to no purpose in trans WoE

Oh yeah? OH YEAH? Yeah, well... neither does... eh... YOUR MOTHER! That's right punk, you wanna make something of it? Hmm!? You wanna take it outside?


...

[Pistis_Sophia]

Nidsrule Wrote:

Pistis_Sophia Wrote:If you dont own a catle, why would you need to suddently recall as a strategy?

And if you own a castle, why bother gearing to attack non-trans castle leaving your castle defenseless?

We are talking about a case where a guild holds one castle and sends part of its force off to attack alde on the side. If they suddenly have a large scale attack on their other castle then of course the guild is going to recall to defend. What other scenario would call for a guild to split its forces?

Of course a guild isn't going to leave it's castle defenseless. That's where the argument that guilds should split their force between alde and trans WoE falls apart. There is a decent balance with trans WoE at this stage and if one guild were to attempt to split its forces between trans and non trans WoE, this balance falls apart and said guild essentially shoots itself in the foot. That's the problem so many people have with the way Alde is setup at this stage. Giving Alde it's own time slot solves that issue.

EDIT: Even with the increased char limit (which really doesn't affect anything since people only require 2 chars to go between trans and non trans WoE) people cant seamlessly go between trans and non trans WoE as both characters will be useless in the wrong situation (trans cant enter alde, non trans serves next to no purpose in trans WoE).

It is what I don't want to give... the opportunity for the same bunch of people to defend 2 castle, one at a time.

If you are defending a high eco on your trans castle, why do you even bother attacking other castles? Anyway, there are plenty of other guilds looking for a castle (3 opened castles for how many guilds?) that can rather choose to attack Alde than a trans castle if it was worth it.

And if it's a non-trans and you don't want to be recalled on that character, then it's a little additionnal protection for them. The same protection applies from Alde to trans castles. If Bamboo gets recalled to Alde then they have to log-off their trans and then use their non-trans. Or they just been "useless" with their non-trans in the trans WoE. This handicap goes both ways and you just seems to forget it.


Edited: Removed a comment.

[Force-Attuned Krogoth]

I think there's a great deal of hyperbole flying around here, particularly involving the concept of impossibility.??Impossible means it cannot be done, no matter how much you want it.??Something you don't want is not inherently impossible, even if you REALLY don't want it.

For the sake of the following argument, I shall assume you are correct about the impossibility of dividing forces between trans and nontrans woe.??You must, with that indivisible regiment, decide whether to participate in trans woe or nontrans woe.??It is not impossible to choose trans.??It is not impossible to choose nontrans.??If you do not consider it worth your time and effort, and pick the other path, that does not confer impossibility upon nontrans woe.??

You choose, for three hours a week, to consider aldebaran valueless.??Yet for the other hundred and sixty five hours, you choose to believe it's an unfair abomination that unbalances the system and places rewards in the hands of those who don't deserve them.??How do you explain this dichotomy???It's not worth your time, but too valuable for your neighbor's???The inaction in your actions belies the crisis in your crisis.


EDIT: Hey, I thought of a neat metaphor.

Bob a mid-level manager in a successful engineering firm. Jim flips burgers at McDonald's, and has several times declined advancement in the company. Bob has a bachelor's degree in civil engineering and a master's in business, Jim has a master's in math. Bob has a car and a house, while Jim rents an apartment and rides the bus. Jim watches the sports games on his 19" TV, and checks his email on a Dell netbook. Bob has a 57" plasma screen, and a PWNbox? built by Alienware. One day Bob realizes that Jim gets the same internet and TV package as Bob, and he spends the same money on it. Bob is outraged and writes to his senator that there ought to be a law to keep Jim from getting the same thing as Bob, when Bob's job is so much harder.

Should congress intervene?