IDEAS FOR RYZOM


uiWebPrevious1234uiWebNext

#55 [en] 

Daomei
That would be favorable for all players, be they involved in PvP and OP fights or not.
No it wouldn't. Where is your evidence for this? Don't presume to speak for all players. Limiting OP numbers would turn OPs into elitest events and prevent many people from being introduced to PvP in a fun and friendly environment.
Daomei
Whether or not the higher skill or the higher number decides, could then be tested in the field. It is therefore not useful to speculate before having evidence.
The evidence Daomei has been presented many times by smaller numbers beating bigger numbers, some examples have been mentioned in this thread.
Daomei
They do not need to try doubling bomb heal spamming by enchants but keep them to handle emergencies such as a fallen alliance member.
Of course more numbers give an advantage but the fact is smaller numbers can prevail with the right tactics. I disagree with you that they shouldn't try new things- they should new things like doubling bomb heal or any other tactic they haven't tried because their current tactics aren't working. Marauders have won in the past with smaller numbers. Now other factions have better tactics they need to up their game in reply.

---


________________________

Guild Leader of Syndicate
________________________



Facebook
Syndicate's Page (Shuriiken here)
A glimpse into Virg's life
Thug life

I belong to the warrior in whom the old ways have joined the new
NB: Void respawn is where you can find the PVP, also willing to give lessons :)

#56 [en] 

Virg: You must admit that an argument "numbers do not matter" would be more credible when uttered by one of the factions with the lower numbers.

My argument stems from observations in military history as well as observation of OP battles here. Smaller numbers may be made up by tactics and training level for a while, sure. But at some point, the adverse side will have learnt and adopted the more effective tactics, or developped methods to counter them. The game of sword and shield, what strategy is all about, since millennia.

And from that point on, numeric and resource superiority will count and be decisive. No matter whether it is a superior production and recruiting base in RL wars or 20, 30 or more healers of all levels thrown into the battle for support, here. Numbers matter.

As to the proposed solution: It will reduce the battle to the elite fighters only once, afterwards, the numerically superior side is free to carry her full weight and value to the battlefield. If really tactics matter, the tactically better side will prevail even without mass support.

But such a scheme would even out chances. No defeated attacker could claim to have been outnumbered. Attacks would be encouraged and the number of OP battles increase.

And I would be ranting again everytime when they are clashing with NPC boss rounds :)

---

Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral

#57 [en] 

Well the marauders used to love telling me that I missed the battle where they won we far fewer numbers. "Numbers do not matter"- did I say that? are you putting words in my mouth? I say they are an advantage just like decent tactics.

Yes the other side have learnt better tactics, now it is time for the sides who aren't winning to produce some counter-tactics.

If you don't cap the number every time then whats the point?

---


________________________

Guild Leader of Syndicate
________________________



Facebook
Syndicate's Page (Shuriiken here)
A glimpse into Virg's life
Thug life

I belong to the warrior in whom the old ways have joined the new
NB: Void respawn is where you can find the PVP, also willing to give lessons :)

#58 [en] 

My apologies if I misunderstood. The point of the proposal is to bring more movement into the OP battle scene. An attacker would have the chance to limit numbers once. In case of success, the attacker would become the defender next time, and the now attacking side may choose any number of participants, probably a much higher or even unlimited one.

One might see then whether better tactics or numbers are the key to success.

---

Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral

#59 [en] 

Hm I am not sure either. However looking with a first phase cap and second phase no cap I still don't see the point. Firstly players are limited from the first phase and if the OP doesn't go to second phase then many players will have no involvement at all. Secondy people believe the OP situation currently is due to numbers and nothing to do with tactics, so having a second phase "no cap" would not change the OP ownership.

---


________________________

Guild Leader of Syndicate
________________________



Facebook
Syndicate's Page (Shuriiken here)
A glimpse into Virg's life
Thug life

I belong to the warrior in whom the old ways have joined the new
NB: Void respawn is where you can find the PVP, also willing to give lessons :)

#60 [en] 

As I understood, the cap should be valid for the whole conflict. In case the attacking side wins, it is up to the former owner, or another attacker, to choose different numbers for the next battle.

---

Daomei die Streunerin - religionsneutral, zivilisationsneutral, gildenneutral
uiWebPrevious1234uiWebNext
 
Last visit Thursday, 14 November 05:01:15 UTC
P_:G_:PLAYER

powered by ryzom-api