Make WoE more of a battle.

[ChrisJ951]

Consistently during WoE there is only one castle which most of the guilds go after leaving the others either empty or weakly guarded. The number of castles should be reduced to one or two (preferably one in my opinion) BUT more balance should be added at least.

Encourage guilds to Ally by making it so Allied guilds CAN enter guild dungeons even if they didn't take the castle themselves. This second part should be voted on but possibly allow them to use the flag to warp into the castle as well (this second part has both pros and cons so Im not entirely sure it should be implemented).

Furthermore to encourage alliances other than just for the dungeon make it so possibly Allied members get points as well. (Possibly implement a check to see if more than 10+ members were on in the allied guild to give points, this second part I dont know if is feasible, but it certainly would encourage allying over just the guild dungeons and mvping)

Implement cross guild chat. At worst this would require implementing IRC which many servers have already done, where you can enter an ip address and password and allows guilds to have their own chat if a natural, in game one isn't possible.

For those arguing less castles will only allow DoE to take a castle, well simply ally and take them down. There are enough people on this server, that if working together can beat DoE and their numbers.
The second part of the suggestion would make it so you don't have to merge, and can keep your guilds, but will still give you most or even all of the benefits of the having the guild castle yourself too.

****Meant castle points and rewards

[Incarn]

allies will always and forever suck balls until they aren't warped out by an allied emp break or can be ecalled all together

allies should stick to one guild for cohesiveness -they need to figure out what guild will have the woe alts and what guild will have the rest. don't encourage actual cross-guild alliances, since they suck unless you have specific strategies and plans built around them. encourage merging instead


also- points for what...? woe points? you get those for being in the castle. it has absolutely nothing to do with being in any guild. anyone can go into a castle and get woe points, even if they're guildless

if you're talking about attendance points for a guild storage system, that's a guild's job, not the GMs'

[Snowhawk]

They won't shrink the Castles again.

Your complaint has been done before and answer last time was no. Expect the same answer this time.

[Former-GM-Circe]

This is always one of the most yoyoing topics we get, simply because so much of it relies on players, too.

We've gone between 2 and 3 castles a bunch of times in the past, and it always ends up going back to the other. Then back again. Then the other way.
I, personally, am not sure of the merit of 1 castle. I think it would end up getting to a point where 1 guild just holds it to the point where the other guilds just start giving up (Retro WoE recently, anyone? D: )
I see the merit of 2 again, but then, I'm only 1 GM on a team.

I'm also interested to see what will happen with 4srs, and just how much the new Behe will WoE now that it's not required by them. Players do have a giant effect on WoE (.. annoyingly. ;D )


Anyone in a castle during WoE who has registered gets WoE points.
If you mean for chests, etc, then I think that's something the guilds need to work out between themselves, as you'd be tossing between reducing the capturing guilds chest rewards dependent on how many allies they have, or you'd have fairly organised guild splitting up into more guilds and allying to increase their chest and castle prizes.

As for allies, just all jumping in together to beat DoE, you'd need to be very organised to be able to organise multiple guilds like that to be effective.
We see things like that all the time in monster invasions, etc. A small, highly efficient and organised party can take down the MvPs easily, but a large group, even made up of several smaller groups, all tend to have different plans and tactics and can take forever to get the MvP down, if at all. (Haha, Tend.)
I'm not saying other guilds are sloppy or unorganised or anything, but you're proposing a bunch of guilds all allying to take DoE down, and generally the larger you get, the more disorganised things get.


We actually had, maybe even still have, an IRC channel. It was never actually really used at all, so was never expanded upon.
We also used to have/still do? a vent server where guilds could get passworded channels, etc.
Simply, guilds like to have these things under their own direct control, rather than use the servers. Same goes with guild forums.
Yup. That's how often the IRC/Vent were used. I can't even recall if they ever actually went down.

[Incarn]

KoJ used the heRO vent server for a short time. as far as i know it's still up; it just uses an old version of ventrilo.

[Eldakar]

GM-Circe Wrote:you're proposing a bunch of guilds all allying to take DoE down

Bring it on.

[The Legendary Joe]

I'd like to make woe more of a battle by turning friendly fire on.??You'd still be safe from party members, but anyone outside of party, in your guild, or not can be attacked and hurt. This could add some new tactics of strategy, like professors with mind breaker on the precast wizards,??and??"STOP PRECAST SO WE CAN GET THE TRAPS SETUP!!" Loki's would still be doable, but you'd want to make sure they're in the party with the wizards

And maybe, just maybe??the retro guild(s) can find some way to amuse themselves until a worthy challenger steps up to bat.


But wait, that's more like PVP,??is it possible to do that but keep the GVG reducts and the whole capture the flag/emp thing?

[Gojira]

Actually, we already are a few members who leave FP during woe to entertain ourselves lol

[Adrillf]

Retro WoE has always been retro WoE.

There is one guild that always just stands there and watches the portal. There's occasionally a few people that come in and say hi, but most of the time the most excitement that you'll see is when you get bored and you leave guild and try to kill your own guild.

Bamboo did it for years, now FP is doing it.

Retro WoE is there for free WoE points, free chests, and an hour of time that you can screw around on your non-trans characters. It's never been seriously competitive, and when it does get competitive, it's only for a few months, and then it's back to sitting in a room chatting with people, knowing that nothing bad will happen. If you want free chests and free guild dungeon access become THE non-trans guild, and it's yours.

If you think normal WoE is a snooze fest, go play in retro for a few weeks. You'll use up more pots (because there isn't as high and fast as spike damage so you have more time to pot) see the same 10 people, and for the first 45-50 minutes it'll be fun and games, and then for the last 10 the single guild that is always in control will sit down in the emp room and say no to whoever tries to come in the door.

So- for your suggestion on making only one castle- THAT is what happens when there is only one castle. One guild stays in control, nothing happens, and no one is involved in WoE.

As a referal back to an old idea: here's my view. Retro WoE- one castle, one guild in charge of it. Normal WoE- 3 castles and just about 3 guilds (possibly 4) that play in it. If you want more WoE active guilds and more people involved with WoE, open up all of the castles. Open season on castles means more people trying for them. Assuming that we open up all of the castles, and assuming that tradition stays the same- we'd suddenly have 20, or more, active WoE guilds.

[The Legendary Joe]

Still, my suggestion still stands, It's just an added benefit if??more people get their jollies because of it. Friendly Fire On!