Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. lkjewq

    WoE Time #DST

    NATG can make the current WoE times no problem. We can probably make WoE times if they're shifted around a couple hours too. We were ghosted on Saturday and we checked attendance Sunday morning to see <5 people on per guild so we just played another server we scouted. Whether or not we will continue to make WoEs here, idk. I personally am not a fan of the current meta: zerg emp on attack, defend around a flag-in point so you can zerg back on defense.
  2. Best revisionist history goes to Robb though. Our first week back we had that flag despite only doing weekend WoEs and then we stopped doing night WoEs consistently because everyone ran from us (again). Let's not sit around here and pretend you guys don't actively dodge us in WoE whenever we show up for real.
  3. It was in response to putting down a LP in lokis. It looks like you guys figured out ensembles cancel other ensembles (gypsy uses invulnerable siegfried then lp instantly lands), only took a week or so it seems. Good job. Let's not pretend there isn't an "edit" for a ton of clips where we ran into the emperium room, bodied you guys, and then your respawns/silm's flank killed us. Very interesting clips. Let's also not pretend anyone in the world wants to put a decent amount of time editing music to mediocre clips that you consider too vital to be omitted. If you want to see a highlight of your WoE from your POV, how about someone in your guild records it and then posts it for us all to see. From what I've heard, some members do record for your guild. Maybe they've seen the same thing from reviewing the footage I've seen: you guys play well sometimes (as seen by our less-than-ideal rosters wiping) but the majority of the GVGs won are off the back of the defender's advantage or assistance from other guilds. If that was the backbone of my success I wouldn't put a video of that together either. Furthermore, I'm sorry if you think the highlights of your WoE weren't in this video. It just so happens that your highlights of WoE are just some mundane clip(s) that couldn't fit in a 5 minute highlight reel out of a 60 minute event.
  4. lkjewq

    Speed Pots

    A delay isn't a bad idea or a method of cancelling them. If you're rich enough to spam them you can do some pretty hilariously broken things in WoE. If you want to go the delay route, I say give them a special kind of delay: i.e. no delay when out of combat (i.e. no damage taken in last 10 seconds) but a 5 or 10 second delay in-combat (damage taken in previous 10 seconds). Speed pots on tanky characters can effectively force you defend only on emp.
  5. You need 3 kiels for 90% plus another 10% if you want to do anything besides LP and dispel. Look here for HWC changes. Piercing is capped at 50% and each HWC is only 15%. https://www.anomalyro.com/wiki/index.php/Balancing_Changes
  6. describe newbie no kiels? no hwc? go full support. otherwise, same as wizard but you can pick your cards for damage in accessories and then either way there is some cute stuff to do with your max sp.
  7. Right now, as it is, no-one except the strongest guild gets anything during SE and that was very clearly a deterrent whenever guilds became "too busy" to WoE vs NATG in our first go-around here. I think them not getting any drops despite competing was a big deterrent (as seen by the SE WoEs being the first casualty and then FE WoEs). Splitting the drops allows for more guilds to get a piece of the pie without the winners getting everything and the losers getting nothing. I don't particularly think cutting the end-amount of drops from castles is a bad thing as long as they are obtainable through other mechanics and they are not exclusive. There is nothing exclusive about holding a castle for 30 minutes and then holding it at the end of WoE as there may be with breaking the Emperium 3 times and holding the castle at the end of WoE. Sure, giving some drops per N minutes held is a pretty good idea too. You could also add mid-WoE announcements for certain milestones and when the drops would be received to add more urgency/competitiveness to denying/obtaining the drops. Action should spike around those intervals if everyone is aware of them.
  8. lkjewq

    Guild Package

    How much time does it actually take to implement a guild pack though? An hour of brainstorming what to put in there, a hour to make an item that gives those drops upon opening, and a hour making a post. I'm being a little generous as some of this can take less or more time depending on how hard you're slacking/not slacking. I think you should pursue every avenue possible to bring in more players. Especially if it's an entire guild. I'm not trying to trivialize your efforts or anything to that effect but this is something I think can bring guilds if they're looking to expand their horizons. Coerce and TryHard from Inertia would have been two guilds that might have stuck around to fight RIP if there hadn't been other circumstances that occurred. I would put money on one of those guilds at least receiving a gpack.
  9. Look through YouTube's most recent WoE videos. If you have more than a week between videos you're likely to be flooded into the abyss.
  10. In an effort to boost advertisement, I recommend rewarding guilds and individuals that generate content on a publicly indexed media platform (i.e. YouTube) of premier events on the server (i.e. WoE/BG) on a weekly basis. For BG, we could have users submit their videos and you reward the top X individuals per week or monthly (akin to the guide event). For WoE, we could have users submit their videos and you reward the best video per competitive (this shouldn't be 3 friends trolling people in WoE and recording it) guild for WoE (think of this as another way to reward guilds for participating in WoE even if they don't win). This should be on a weekly basis as we need to keep as much video content rolling as possible. We don't need to highlight all WoEs but we should at least give people the opportunity to highlight a few. Reward the individual who creates the video but limit it to one reward per guild as we don't need 5 point-of-views for each guild and a legitimate economic strategy to be to get as many members as possible to record WoE and break the economy. If you want to disperse the rewards more, you add in rules for eligibility such as an individual can only be rewarded once per month but the guild is rewarded once per week.
  11. I have stated this numerous times but the current reward system for WoE is busted in that it incentivizes guilds to only play for the castle at the end of WoE. Here are some symptoms of this system: Guilds show up extremely late to WoE (we're talking last 10 minutes here) to run over the side castle. Guilds compete for the main castle all WoE then flee to the secondary castle at the end if they're unsuccessful. Any guild that isn't the second best or nearly the second best is guaranteed to end WoE without any rewards. All of these are bad for WoE if we want there to be more than N guilds for a WoE with N castles. Proposed Solution (limited economic effect): Cut treasure drop rate in half (the WoE drop rate) and provide the projected amount of WoE drops (rounded up to account for econ building throughout the week) at the castle's current economy to the leader of the guild who held the castle the longest at the end of WoE. The result is this: Half of the current amount of drops go to the owner of the castle at the end of WoE The other half of the current amount of drops go to the guild that held the castle the longest. I'll be honest, I don't have another good solution for this at the moment since any sort of grading via kills/deaths would lead to toxic behavior in WoE that is not objective focused. The only thing I could get behind with kill-wise is some sort of system that could detect when a guild wipes another guild (away from a portal) as I think encouraging GvGs and fighting between the guilds rather than a mad dash for the emperium is a good thing. Any effort to implement this kind of a system would be difficult and could probably be gamed if you knew the specifics.
  12. lkjewq

    Guild Package

    Kind of my point about lowering the gcap. Leading a guild of 28 for WoE (which is really like 40 outside of WoE to get 28 online) is no joke and isn't personal at all. Leading a guild of say 20 (12-16 per WoE) is much more reasonable from a time commitment and logistics standpoint. I definitely don't think that the gcap should go to 10 but that's definitely part of my thinking about lowering gcap is to take some of the burden off of leaders and allow smaller guilds to rise up and compete. This is definitely semi-off topic but I think this topic and the other topic about gcap are closely related as they're trying to do the same thing through multiple avenues. The thing is that I think Anomaly is a good enough server to keep people online after they login. I definitely think there are some more things that could be done to get people to login. This server is something that is hard to swallow for a lot of RO traditionalist out there. Anomaly is a 500 and multi-slot server. Both of those are not main-stream by any measure. I do think you bring up a good point about the guilds being granted the guild pack do not stick around forever but I would be interested in knowing how many of their players stuck around. The guild may not have stuck around forever but a number of its members could. These members may or may not have joined without that guild in the first place.
  13. lkjewq

    Guild Package

    It's definitely profitable for them to join established guilds. The current WoE rewards system needs an over-haul as basically only the strongest 2 guilds get compensated at all for WoEing. They fight over the main castle then the weaker guilds flee to the second castle at the end and the second strongest guild usually gets the second castle. This can be fixed by adding rewards for holding the castle a certain duration. This also reduces the amount of griefing guilds will do to one another when attacking a single guild on defense. It's absolutely disheartening that we almost had something going for a bit there with SA/NBH (3rd + 4th) starting the trek up to becoming competitive guilds and then they merged and now we're back to 3 guilds. The names of the guilds might be different but there are far too many similarities between THW+BL and DD+Silm to fool anyone to thinking we've actually acquired "new guilds" as opposed to just a re-brand.
  14. lkjewq

    Guild Package

    The people currently playing are already active enough. This topic is aimed at getting new blood to the server. Guild packages are one method of doing this as you're more likely to stick around if you have friends (or guild mates) keeping you involved. We need more distinct guilds as opposed to small groups of players coming and flocking to the already established guilds. The guild package should be part of the advertising structure to assist in getting guilds interested in playing. As far as instanced content and what not being sufficient to catch up, sure while it might be it isn't going to make someone feel like they're being rewarded for joining the server whereas a guild package is literally rewarding them for joining. Players are much more likely to join when they have an actual incentive that's quantifiable for joining rather than the promise of some new content players didn't have before but now currently have that allows you to catch up easier. 15 is probably too high, I was trying to keep a higher number as I'm sure lots of people here are against catch-up mechanics and making it easier for new players than it was for previous players. If you want to aim at guilds, 15 should be the minimum really. If you want to aim at groups of players, 5-10 is where you want to aim. Also, Hylian are you done blatantly trolling?
  15. lkjewq

    Guild Cap Change

    A guild limit of anything over 20 is bad for this server. This prevents more guilds from popping up and competing. I don't think anyone is asking for proof whether or not some guilds can get over 20. I mean if I straight up open NATG recruitment we'll have 28+?? every WoE and no-one will have fun and everyone will start dodging WoE again. Is that fun? It isn't good for the server if any guild has 28 people. A capacity of 24 reduces the problem slightly but is a half-hearted band-aid fix than a long-term solution. Reduce the capacity to 20. We need the WoE scene to be more accessible to other guilds.