Forums Home Forum Rules Achaea.com Lore Wiki Vote for Achaea! IronRealms.com
Home› Everything Achaea› The Golden Dais of Creation

Endgame - Faction Balance

MizikMizik
edited September 2014 in The Golden Dais of Creation
Okay. @Jacen @Sarapis @Tecton @Makarios @Mortori

We split the game two-ways. Each of the two factions have directly opposing endgame goals.

Ashtan + Hashan + Mhaldor vs Targossas + Cyrene + Eleusis.

We have the best combat system in the gaming world, so let's work with that.

Battlefields would be established by a revolving area of interest. There would be two kinds of encounters. 1) Large scale unlimited players allowed, battle goals yielding XX point values, 2)  more regular battles where leading faction can enter X% less amount of players than non-leading faction OR MOST must be from city C - the weaker one. To begin, should a new participant from faction B enter area of interest, a random participant from faction A would be warped out. Once killed within, we could say..smash them into orbit, where it takes 60 seconds (graced) to crash back the world of Achaea to re enter the battlefield. 5 rooms from within the area of interest are violence free.

Current endgame goal holder provide utility, boasting rights or monetary gain for cities - travel, end/wp regen, xp boost, city gold/credit increase (for citizen credit sale support), Deity statue at NoT, essence bonus per offer/kill etc. There is a limited pool of benefits that are distributed by the cities. For example, say there are 9 benefits, each city could have 3 slots, then the weaker city could have the top ones; or no limit and give city C all the hard benefits. For example, Ashtan would be more interested in statue, essence, flavour stuff while having little use for the hard bonuses.

Each city keeps their laws, but INDIVIDUAL city factions are divided for roleplay and flavour (pretty much what it is now). The isolationist status quo will obviously have to go, but I think that has done more to harm the game than benefit.

Icons can no longer be destroyed, but go dormant for 72 hours when depleted to 0%.

To be determined: 

What represents the factions?

What's are the goals within the battlefield, and how are scores kept?

Remove class restrictions within factions?

Should we tie Icons and Nishnatoba into this?
image
«1

Comments

  • MizikMizik
    edited September 2014
    Why? I wouldn't stop playing the role of Mizik the Endbringer. You don't have to stop being the Eleurenian Whitesian. You play your character like you would. Let's say there's a global cataclysm and the side has CHOSEN YOU.

    The Reckoning, for example. Did the game break? Of course not. You can't stop roleplay.

    Of course, this is an idea I just threw together. Since we're both players in the same game, suggestions are definitely welcome.

     
    image
  • BukariinBukariin
    One word:

    Thunderdome.



  • HodHod
    edited September 2014
    I like your idea Mizik. Picture attached is how I would draw the lines.

    Essentially you have two strong com cities plus one strong noncom vs the same.

    I like the idea of opening up classes to other cities but IMO only for Hashan and Cyrene, since they could potentially be neutral grounds for the their allied cities. I think this opens up more opportunity for these cities to grow as well since they are free to have occultists fighting alongside apostates, for example. I approve of this beyond the scope of the event, even.

    I like the idea of icon dormancy if only so Mhaldor can actually have icons, heh, and I love the idea of actually using Nish as a place to wage war. Maybe even for battleground style events, like CTF, though more unique. I would like to see something involving denizens, like Mhaldor leading hordes of demons into Nish and Ashtan bringing Chaos entities, etc, fighting for control (this could also perhaps be used to balance out during on off times). Maybe king of the hill type scenario? EDIT: KOTH isn't exactly what I mean, more like... Risk if you're familiar with it? Maybe instead of specific icons for houses we'd be fighting for icons that function like relics to whoever is being empowered by them (one for health regen, mana regen, etc, etc).
    war.png 11.4K
  • MizikMizik
    edited September 2014
    It wasn't so long ago that factions used to cooperate.

    Like in real life, I don't believe that hatred MUST be inherent to religious difference. No one needs to violate beliefs. They must cooperate for survival. 

    As far as factional "goals", you have to remember that they're not actually attainable. They're not real. They're ideas, and will continue to be so. 
    image
  • XerXer Langley
    Like his background?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------
    e^(iπ) + 1 = 0
  • KinilanKinilan
    Xer said:
    Like his background?
    BITCH I WILL CUT YOU!
  • TeshaTesha
    @Kinilan should make history textbooks.

     i'm a rebel

  • AktillumAktillum Philippines
    What we need is a draft lottery. Everyone put their names into a hat, we shake it vigorously, and each faction takes turns drawing names from the hat. Problem solved, I'm a genius, lets roll with that idea.

  • AodfionnAodfionn Seattle, WA
    edited September 2014
    What Kinilan said
    Aurora says, "Are you drunk, Aodfionn?"
  • SeftinSeftin
    For example, Ashtan would be more interested in statue, essence, flavour stuff while having little use for the hard bonuses.



  • RangorRangor
    Nope, don't wanna be on team cyrene/targossas again. Someone else can be on the Nature faction!
    image
  • RuthRuth Singapore
    Then that'll be like. Hashan + Ashtan + Mhaldor vs Targossas + Cyrene vs Eleusis.
    "Mummy, I'm hungry, but there's no one to eat! :C"

     

  • MishgulMishgul Trondheim, Norway
    Can prob think of a timed events with certain situations happening, where certain cities would benefit from different outcomes for different objectives. They can then choose to work together or not, or against each other to try  to win a objective x, then the outcome of objective y will be different for team 1 and team 2, but the outcome of objective z will be the same, so they can work together to try and stop team 3 from gaining, then one team might stab the other in the back to gain points in objective z to try and outrun the second team.

    That's just some vague idea i have.

    -

    One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the belief that one's work is terribly important

    As drawn by Shayde
    hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae
  • MizikMizik
    It sounds like you're missing the point, though. It's geared toward balancing the small cities. Empower the little guy, forcing them to have majority presence while then receiving most of the benefit. Improve player relation. 

    No back stabbing, definitely not. 

    I get the idealistic preferences. My split is definitely more balanced. Actually, no suggestions seem to be realistic toward a balanced, fun game for all. 
    image
  • MishgulMishgul Trondheim, Norway
    Fair enough.

    -

    One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the belief that one's work is terribly important

    As drawn by Shayde
    hic locus est ubi mors gaudet succurrere vitae
  • RangorRangor
    when we want fair games, we play leeg. :)

    I loved the reckoning type playstyle though, but I like that it is done through individual events.
    image
  • MizikMizik
    edited September 2014
    Hm. You're right. 

    It might be a good idea to keep The Reckoning on a regular basis. I seriously thought that was some revolutionary shit.

    Let's say each time they initiate conflict,  the reason can be different. 

    The only thing the reckoning was missing was small player (Hashan) incentive.  Otherwise it was perfect. 

    I really do want to focus on big brother/little brother city relationship.  Or at least an opportunity to give it a run,  where spoils can be shared or given. 
    image
  • AktillumAktillum Philippines
    edited September 2014
    Why does Eleusis get lumped in with Targ and Cyrene? Screw all you city-dwellers, Nature will reclaim what is hers, vines will wreathe themselves around your towers and all that good stuff. Eleusis worked pretty hard to become isolationist and hostile towards city-folks.

    I just don't see how polarized factions are good for gameplay. The Reckoning came smack in the middle of Eleusis starting to take an aggressive tone with Targossas, and the way it turned into Team Red vs Team Blue felt like a smack in the face of the factional RP we'd been working hard on.

    Like Bluji said, this whole thing feels like locking Achaea into Horde vs Alliance. Mechanically speaking it seems like a cool idea, battlefields and big factional battles, but surely there's a way to re-work the idea into all the cities competing for themselves. Or allow RP'd alliances, if the cities want. But definitely in no way whatsoever should factions be locked into alliances.

  • NimNim
    Blujixapug said:
    I really like the overall idea of battlefields as a major competitive org vs org activity. Achaea needs something like that. But I think you're far too dismissive about how damaging it would be to permanently lump factions together. RP/politics/socialising and their respective endgames are as big a part of this game as PK, and locking things in as Alliance vs Horde kills a lot of that.
    In fairness, intercity politics tends to currently be "I hate you guys" for every pair of cities, with rare exceptions being "I don't hate you guys, but if you burned in a fire tomorrow I wouldn't care much."
  • BlujixapugBlujixapug
    Mizik said:

    The only thing the reckoning was missing was small player (Hashan) incentive.  Otherwise it was perfect. 

    I really do want to focus on big brother/little brother city relationship.  Or at least an opportunity to give it a run,  where spoils can be shared or given. 
    You could make it somehow burdensome for a city to hold more than say, 33% of rewards.

    So if Ashtan a hypothetical city holds more than 3/9, it starts to dramatically reduce their reset time. Or it becomes harder for that city to win additional rewards, by exponentially increasing their threshold for victory. This would permit cities to still fight but hand off rewards to an allied city, which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

    What type of battles do you envision this system involving? Area-wide PVP? It could be interesting if some of the battlefields involved different things, like ship battles, NPC boss battles, or subterfuge.
    image
  • TharvisTharvis The Land of Beer and Chocolate!
    Aktillum said:
    Why does Eleusis get lumped in with Targ and Cyrene? Screw all you city-dwellers, Nature will reclaim what is hers, vines will wreathe themselves around your towers and all that good stuff. Eleusis worked pretty hard to become isolationist and hostile towards city-folks.

    I just don't see how polarized factions are good for gameplay. The Reckoning came smack in the middle of Eleusis starting to take an aggressive tone with Targossas, and the way it turned into Team Red vs Team Blue felt like a smack in the face of the factional RP we'd been working hard on.

    Like Bluji said, this whole thing feels like locking Achaea into Horde vs Alliance. Mechanically speaking it seems like a cool idea, battlefields and big factional battles, but surely there's a way to re-work the idea into all the cities competing for themselves. Or allow RP'd alliances, if the cities want. But definitely in no way whatsoever should factions be locked into alliances.
    @Jhui for warchief.
    Aurora says, "Tharvis, why are you always breaking things?!"
    Artemis says, "You are so high maintenance, Tharvis, gosh."
    Tecton says, "It's still your fault, Tharvis."

  • CynlaelCynlael
    Let's just Shallam everywhere, can be err'one vs err'one.

Sign In or Register to comment.