Welcome to the Achaea Forums! Please be sure to read the Forum Rules.

The War: Ideas not rants.

13

Comments

  • ReysonReyson Member Posts: 753 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    Combined format battles would be super amazing.

    I loved the Nish format- first side totally eliminated loses. That was a fun way to fight.
    XadenTorinnBann
  • XadenXaden Member Posts: 2,315 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Having to take control of an enemies village would be awesome too.

    Could stop the repop on blackrock / jaru and the opposing side has to lay siege and murder all the villagers, allied side needs to secure the villagers / fight them off. 
         He is a coward who has to bring two friends as backup to jump people hunting.

  • TysandrTysandr Member Posts: 443 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Sayenna said:
    neutral party ( Aegean or whatever. I dunno if I'd trust Shield for this, personally ) pairs them for what they think would be the fairest

    Difficult
    Nexus: Accents, Autotriggers, Dragon Talismans
    "As the child did... without the rope. Then fear will find you again."

  • ReysonReyson Member Posts: 753 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    In terms of big battles, fighting in a village would be cool. I liked Nish, though, because there's not so much hopping around- locked into the area is pretty amazing. You got what you got, and you gotta make it work.

    It'd be neat if the admin could seal an area, no earrings/portals/exiting/wings/etc. out of it for the duration of a battle.
    Xaden
  • TysandrTysandr Member Posts: 443 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Reyson said:
    In terms of big battles, fighting in a village would be cool. I liked Nish, though, because there's not so much hopping around- locked into the area is pretty amazing. You got what you got, and you gotta make it work.

    It'd be neat if the admin could seal an area, no earrings/portals/exiting/wings/etc. out of it for the duration of a battle.
    Two areas. Because monks.
    Nexus: Accents, Autotriggers, Dragon Talismans
    "As the child did... without the rope. Then fear will find you again."

    XadenReyson
  • ReysonReyson Member Posts: 753 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    Two areas would be fine, yep!
  • SayennaSayenna Member Posts: 188 ✭✭✭✭ - Eminent
    Tysandr said:
    Sayenna said:
    neutral party ( Aegean or whatever. I dunno if I'd trust Shield for this, personally ) pairs them for what they think would be the fairest

    Difficult
    Not really, I'm confident someone like Morthif could pair people fairly and not have matchups like Proficy vs Aralaya, or Atalkez vs Zackery etc.
  • KeorinKeorin Member Posts: 1,043 @ - Epic Achaean
    Nazihk said:
    It would also legitimately give the Shield a place as a 1v1 slash arena hero combat house, on the grounds that the duel's master-of-arms should hopefully be able to kill either party should they break the duel's rules. 
    Though it's a neat role to play in this fight for sure, and I'm really happy for the people who thought to include the Shield, nothing's going to give the shield a place as a meaningful combat house without making the experience of playing a serious combatant in Cyrene a bit less awful. Especially not something that basically just involves watching other people fight.

    That said, I've gotten to watch some neat fights, and it's definitely been a fun role to play. I'd love to see it happen again, hopefully in a war that involves a little more dueling!
  • FrederichFrederich Member Posts: 1,243 @ - Epic Achaean
    Mathilda said:
    We just had some small skirmishes on Annwyn... @Alrena, @Reyson, @Hataru, @Remilia, @Vercio, @Medi vs @Xaden, @Frederich, @Ada, @Nuala, @Jor, and myself (not everyone present all at once -- only Xaden/Frederich/Me/Nuala and Reyson/Remilia/Medi/Hataru, I think, were there for most of the engagements). It was, speaking for myself, much more fun than duels or the super big Nish fights. Might be something that can be arranged for the next wars! (limited, small skirmishes, that is)

    edit: Although, thinking about it, a big part of why it was fun might be because it wasn't war-related, so there wasn't much at stake except textp. :(
    Pretty much this.
  • AntoniusAntonius Member Posts: 5,004 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Mathilda said:
    edit: Although, thinking about it, a big part of why it was fun might be because it wasn't war-related, so there wasn't much at stake except textp. :(
    Probably this. Nice to have a break from combat that counts for war points where people can just do whatever without having to worry.

    As fun as the Nish battle was I know a lot of people were nervous beforehand about it, even if they aren't normally for fights.
    ExelethrilTysandr
  • ReysonReyson Member Posts: 753 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    The Magna Araneae don't afraid of nothin'!

    Was fun!
  • NazihkNazihk Member Posts: 993 @ - Epic Achaean
    Keorin said:
    Nazihk said:
    It would also legitimately give the Shield a place as a 1v1 slash arena hero combat house, on the grounds that the duel's master-of-arms should hopefully be able to kill either party should they break the duel's rules. 
    nothing's going to give the shield a place as a meaningful combat house without making the experience of playing a serious combatant in Cyrene a bit less awful. 
    You can't make the experience of playing a combatant in Cyrene less awful without combatants.

    Since Cyrene is so adamantly against organizational conflict, your only hope for combatants is to draw in ones who are heavily focused on 1v1 combat. And for that, your best bet is turning the Shield away from 'defenders of Cyrene' and focusing more on a 1v1 specialist path, because you can do 1v1 fights without needing organizational backing.
  • FarrahFarrah Member, Secret Squirrel Posts: 2,636 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    I honestly don't think a war should be decided by 1v1 duels. I'm ok with them being a very small part of one, but as far as people are suggesting expanding it, forcing more duels, etc., I just don't think that makes much sense. That's a tournament, not a war.

    Obviously the current system has issues too, but I'd probably just scrap duels entirely for a future war.

    (Though if we want to have a city v city tournament somehow at another time, we certainly could!)
    YselaMicaelisAilea
  • ReysonReyson Member Posts: 753 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    edited June 2017
    Well, it was mentioned in the other thread, but doing it like bicentennials, with categories each city scores points in and thus wins points towards their overall score through would be neat. Higher points awarded for Nish battles/sanctions/etc., but ship battles, duels, both can have categories that contribute to victory.

    I don't want to discourage dueling. It's one of the things that make Achaea very unique, and it's a nice contribution to a character's story- X put up the most points towards earning Y city the lead through their dueling effort is a compelling line of advancement, and it rewards 1v1/2v2 in a game where 1v1/2v2 is becoming increasingly rare.
  • CooperCooper Member Posts: 5,562 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    Should have just made the cities pick X number of duelists and they all have to fight each other once during the war. Whichever city wins the most = points.

    Reyson
  • NazihkNazihk Member Posts: 993 @ - Epic Achaean
    Nah, do it one point per win, that way all the duels matter.

    If it's just most wins takes all, then once one side takes a majority of the duels the rest of them are meaningless. If it's straight up one point per duel then every duel has value.
  • FarrahFarrah Member, Secret Squirrel Posts: 2,636 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    I don't think not hinging a war on dueling discourages it. People can duel anytime they want. There could also be a city v city tournament if there's interest, which would make it important.

    I think Cooper's method makes the most sense though if dueling was going to be included.
  • MicaelisMicaelis Member Posts: 369 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    I'm with @Farrah on the duels. I know a lot of people (Reyson, obviously, for the love of god obviously) wants to duel and duel and duel, but it's entirely irrelevant to what a "war" is and, in terms of RP, it takes away from even calling this thing an actual war. Between the points, the schedules, it's more like a mutually-agreed upon confrontation with clear limitations and expectations, like war games between allied nations. 

    I think the idea behind it, specifically trying to give war an actual format, is good, but I think we could improve on the immersion of the conflict itself.

    Duels serve no purpose in any format so I'd say to scrap them entirely, same with an in-game 'point' system.

    The pre-scheduled battles don't make any sense from an in-game perspective, but you could keep the same format without the necessity of making it blatantly obvious that it's a pre-scheduled fight so people can log in by having some unimportant OOC objective relayed by an NPC or something. Maybe we have to fight on Nish at this time and date because there's some angel in distress, or a demon is planning to do this and that (specific to Mhaldor v Targossas). This adds depth to the conflict itself (it's not just player versus player, but alignment versus alignment) and applies an in-game reason to battle the enemy at any pre-set time aside from 'most arbitrary amount of points win, and this is worth 5 arbitrary points'. 

    What we could also do is take the ideas from this war, specifically the objective-based game modes, and apply them in a real sense. So instead of '1/3/5/7 points per detonation', make it so something is charged/weakened with each friendly/enemy detonation or disarm. Basically take each of the modes, remove the points values in-game (though you could still track them OOC based on the 'progression' of the unstated item) and remove anything that doesn't make sense in an actual war. You could make room for limited duels in here, but they'd be swing-points rather than having the ability to be the main focus of the entire war, based on point value, if we really, really wanted duels.

    Also you'd need to adjust the value of each thing in a way that makes sense. If you're going to limit tanks to 1/day then the value should be higher. Unlimited, make it lower. The war could 'end' when the above item reaches a certain point and some lasting effect takes place in the losing/winning city, and obviously the duration of the war could be controlled by simply making the necessary level slightly above the max-achievable in a given period of time based almost entirely on the 1 tank/day and pre-scheduled confrontations. 

    Overall, my opinions of the war (coming from someone on an EU timezone, so outside looking in for most) is that it's been a wonderful transition from the previous incarnations but there's still a lot of work to do to improve. Not to say all the efforts of those involved in its creation aren't worthwhile, have to start somewhere, but I think there are some immersion areas that need some work as the entire thing has felt mildly...detached, is a good word I suppose.

    As far as people complaining, they're going to complain no matter what you do. Any time there's a winner and a loser it's just a given. I think most people have done a good job though, and kept the sanctity of the intentions in the forefront of their mind. Shout outs to everyone who's trying to just have a little fun, and shout outs to everyone who helped make this war a little more fun.
    Ysela
  • MorthifMorthif Member Posts: 1,727 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    What about making the dueling segment a tally instead of points per duel. So there's 32 total duels during the 2 week period and Targ won 17 and Mhaldor 15 so Targ gets the 5 points. Have a required minimum number of duels for the event to count. 
    Reyson
  • MicaelisMicaelis Member Posts: 369 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    Are you proposing we use the electoral college for Achaean war duels :(
    Tysandr
  • MathildaMathilda Member Posts: 902 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    Something I thought about was a sort of tug-of-war format:

    There would be five "stations", being Isle of Mhaldor - Enverren Castle - Siroccians - Jaru - Eastern Reaches. The first battle starts in the Siroccians, and whoever wins that pushes the battle to the next; to Enverren, if Targossas wins, and to Jaru, if Mhaldor wins. If, for example, the next scheduled battle got pushed to Jaru, and then Targossas won that, the battle after that gets pushed back to the Siroccians.

    The battles at the Isle and the Reaches would be decisive. If, for example, the battle got pushed to the Isle and Mhaldor lost that, then they lose the war. If they win, it gets pushed back to Enverren.

    Battles could be scheduled every weekend, again. The "winning condition", though, I'm not sure how to determine. Maybe shrine sovereignty? This can potentially drag out the war, yes, but it would all be scheduled battles rather than duels and tank raids, which should be less stressful. Maybe.
     <3 
    YselaTysandr
  • TorinnTorinn Member Posts: 1,337 @ - Epic Achaean
    edited June 2017
    Scheduled shrine battles would be interesting. Attacking side has X time to take sovereignty to win, maybe a window of two hours . Using shrine powers could change things up but would also drain essence a lot. Would give everyone something to do to prepare for the next battle with hunting up essence.
    Deucalion says, "Torinn is quite nice."
  • ReysonReyson Member Posts: 753 ✭✭✭✭✭ - Grand Achaean
    edited June 2017
    @Morthif that's what I was driving at.

    ETA: @Micaelis thought to put a points threshold (whatever you want to call it, doesn't have to be points, can be some more immersive way to keep track) that the first team to get to, wins, is good. Ostensibly, that makes it more urgent, is likely to discourage turtling until the big events come around, and might make wars shorter and more intense, which seems to be what people prefer over drawn out and lukewarm most of the time, with bursts here and there of tons of people logging in.
    Torinn
  • FarrahFarrah Member, Secret Squirrel Posts: 2,636 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited June 2017
    Disarm points are there to encourage defense. I'm a little confused by your last statement.

    The only reason defending is discouraged by the system is because if you don't defend at all, there won't be a sanction and thus there's no reason to defend a fight you don't think you'll win (since sanction + losing defense means tank det points).

    If you think you'll win the defense, defense is encouraged by disarm points. Though, even then, you're better off letting them get sanction and place a tank before you oust them. If they don't get a tank down, you don't get anything for defending.
    AerekTahquil
  • AerekAerek East Tennessee, USAMember Posts: 1,818 @@ - Legendary Achaean
    edited June 2017
    Yeah, looks like I had a brain aneurysm there and it's too late to edit.

    As long as higher-level tanks aren't worth more points, should be fine, since the threat of higher level tanks is generally what discourages defense. Though I would still advocate for contests other than raiding to settle a formal war, since raiding can be done any day without justification.
    -- Grounded in but one perspective, what we perceive is an exaggeration of the truth.
    Tahquil
  • JorJor Member Posts: 17 ✭✭ - Stalwart
    I advocate for a single tournament including a bunch of duels to be part of a war, rather than duels individually being a part of it.
Sign In to Comment.