heRO-Server Forum

I haven't read the four pages of replies so forgive me if I'm repeating anything someone's already said. Individual participation rewards would kinda suck. Since WoE is a team thing IMO rewards should be per guild not per individual. That's what PvP is for.

IMO the best way to revamp WoE would be combining some ideas to give EVERYONE involved a more rewarding and enriched WoE experience.

1. Open four or five forts (diff realms) for trans WoEs. Reset all econ/def on current forts and have them all under GM control to kick off the "new" WoE.

2. De-randomize all fort drops. Each fort has it's own set of drops. Make it so that the ONLY way to complete any god item is by having held each fort at some point. Everything down to the simple gears would be better off coming from specific forts.

3. Have a WPS style system. Maybe reward per month or quarterly. Award 1 point per break and 10 points for each fort held for a FULL WoE. Meaning you get no points for holding unless you had the fort at the start of WoE (meaning prior to) and held that fort without a single break. That would force guilds holding to actually keep people in a fort to hold for full points. It would also give smaller/inexperienced guilds incentive to go around breaking the hell out of each other to rack up points. Maybe have a points cap for breaks ( 5 per WoE?).

Top guild in the points standings per month or quarterly would get to choose from a list of "large" prizes. Points accumulated by all guilds could be spent to purchase things for guild. Simple things like slim white boxes or x amount of WSS/WoE supplies. Things that would keep people WoEing but also make life easier. Maybe have some gear choices or even hats. Higher end stuff could include individual god item parts (for a VERY high points price or top points only). If that's too OP maybe have special headgears or something available that's only available from WoE points.

4. Eliminate alliances (if more forts are available). Given people COULD unofficially ally but without the ability to ally they'd still be able to hurt allies. It just wouldn't work if "allies" are able to hurt each other unintentionally.

Those suggestions would give all players more of a reason to WoE. It would def make it fun and rewarding. Those suggestions are coming from my experience with iRO WoE. The only reason most guilds bother with 1.0 at all is for WPS. There you don't get points for breaks though (only holds). Here it makes sense to have them for breaks as well. That and the set loots on diff forts are the thing that keep WoE going. For the smaller guilds it's the ability to actually be able to get and hold a fort(s).

Note too that if there's a WPS style system in place the heRO high-tier guilds would be forced to send people out to break the other controlling guilds. Nobody would want to give away full holding points by sitting in their own fort. Especially if there are prizes that can only be obtained by being #1 in points standings. This would weaken defenses all-around. It would also potentially give smaller guilds opportunities to break larger guilds. It would also make it difficult to max econ/def on a fort.


EDIT: btw renewal lvling BLOWS. Renewal in general blows so far. A lot of iRO players have left or will soon be leaving because of it. If heRO has a more stable and interesting WoE in place it could def attract better pop. Not just with the pserv folks but a lot from officials with no pserv experience (who effing hate renewal too).

This was my "WoE time" today: I hunted Geffenia for about 45 minutes. I was kind of late to start with and missed the first 15 minutes.

While you guys were WoEing, I killed 130 AKs and got:

• 1 Blood Branch
• 4 Dead Branch
• 7 Gift Box
• 17 Elunium
• 9 Oridecon
• 130 Reins
• bunch of other loots from mistargets
  

In addition to this, I completed a level and got 30% in my level 87.

The stuff itself is around 800~900k. I didn't have to spend bluepots/whitepots/ADs/EDPs/etc.

My WoE was certainly intense AND reliable.
Have a good day :3

Well done, Pistis...
You really helped your guild capture/defend a castle there... Great job...
I can see how you are a credit to your team indeed...

I don't WoE for the rewards, I WoE for fun. Today, there were 4 guilds competing against each other. It was chaotic; it was fun. I don't care about all the healing items I used, I farmed them so I could enjoy WoE, and win or lose, the best wars are the ones when I use the most healing items. People seem to have this idea that the people in WoE are in it for treasure or rewards, and while those are nice, hardly anyone would be there who didn't enjoy it. Adding a third castle could help, but at the moment there's no competition for the second castle until the last 10 minutes. If smaller guilds seriously put effort into defending payon, they probably could.

More castles = more choices. More choices = more mistakes. More mistakes = more AFK getting payon at the end of woe.

Some people haven't been paying attention. There are small guilds. They do sometimes have success. Behemoth is off fighting its latest rival, and they can't spare the 5 minutes at the end to go and kill Voii's castle.

I have.

I've gone in and fought them. I've kicked them out and broken the castle. Being in a somewhat small guild which has dreams of getting bigger, I know what its like to fight the outrageously unfair hoardes of people that the larger guilds have. 1 vs 30 will never be fair. 1 vs 5-6 is a lot more fair/managable/doable. More castles means there's more of those micro fights as the larger guilds will either be spread out, roam from castle to castle taking everything as a big group, or be holed up in their singluar castle to protect their economy investment. And when those smaller guilds have the 15 people they need to do a propper defense or so, then we're moving on to a more fun kind of play, where its group vs group instead of 1 vs 5. Because the people who play for fun will go out looking for a fight. The people in it for the loot will stay and conserve, and with more options, there's more likelyhood of finding what you're looking for.

Is woe 2.0 just as bugged as Battlegrounds? Is that why Its not out yet?

Likes this guys comments :D^

Balduron04 Wrote:Is woe 2.0 just as bugged as Battlegrounds? Is that why Its not out yet?

1. BG isn't "bugged" anymore as far as I know.

2. WoE 2.0 isn't so much an issue of being "bugged" (regardless of whether it is or not) so much as being a WoE that is suited to extremely large populations with altered strategies.??heRO simply can't generate the population needed right now.

We could get into all sorts of "chicken or the egg" type debates about which needs to come first, opportunity or community in terms of WoE-motivating factors...??but I *really* don't think that we could pull of a successful WoE 2.0 here.??It would just be silly.

I mean, WoE 2.0 changes a lot of roles for one thing...??but more than that it really does demand a huge attendance - bigger than Behemoth + RObots combine pull off most WoEs....for ONE guild.??Let alone attack AND defense.??

EDIT: Ange's point about "WoEing for fun" not "rewards" is 100% my position as well.

+1,

WoE is the only reason I play this game. And believe it or not, I play this game for fun.

Thus according to people who play, they support a claim that people can only WoE for fun and you really can't force attendance with rewards. You've got to get players to woe on a sense of self-motivation, or you'll have me who may enter a castle to be cannon fodder and leave as soon as "amount of points qualified yay." XD Increasing/staying the same for number of castles helps with the players who are already woe-ing now, or already joined the server, but doesn't really do much to attract new players to want to start here who may woe as well to add new blood to the pool.

So all fo this goes back to the question of what does heRO have that attracts a woe-interested players to start here and not start anywhere. We aren't going to beat anyone at "perfect renewal server" cause iRO probably got much better renewal mechanics in place than any other pserver at this moment. So what do we have then? We have the "disadvantage" of new players having to play catch up already, so we need to have more bonuses that make our server unique in a way that players will say, "I have to play here and woe here and pvm here, because __________ cannot be found anywhere else." What is in that blank then?

What's heRO's plans for the future, and what do kind of server do we want to be?

azurerogue Wrote:I mean, WoE 2.0 changes a lot of roles for one thing...??but more than that it really does demand a huge attendance - bigger than Behemoth + RObots combine pull off most WoEs....for ONE guild.??Let alone attack AND defense.??

That is very very untrue! Have you ever done 2.0 on officials? I have. Even though there are a LOT of guilds that do 1.0 barely any do 2.0. It's limited to the top three and a few cannon fodder that don't quit guilds. Last 2.0 I attended there were only 4 guilds doing it. My team (my guild splits off into teams) actually went around with a two man team from Lunar just to eco rape forts. It was hella fun since there were a few small guilds fighting each other and us to get those forts. Had to coordinate like mad.

2.0 works like this: 10 forts available. Top three guilds defend their forts with minimal defense. There have been many times when all we did was leave a single scout in our perfect econ fort. Just give a yell for people to come back when it's under attack. Send out smaller teams to help allied forts under attack or eco breaking. Other guilds go around breaking each other but most never actually putting up cades/stones (don't know if they know how tbh). Two forts are really sought after for god item components. Those two are where all the action is. You end up on one of two sides. Either trying to help defend or trying to break those two forts. Last 10 mins everyone splits forces to take a few forts. UNLESS one of the target fort is down to the 3rd cade. Then there's action till the last min in the "big" forts.

2.0 COULD work here but only if it was something like 2-3 forts in diff realms (if there were no alliances). The problem is people who haven't done it tend to think the forts are mega huge. That really isn't the case. It's a diff kind of fort. You have to think of each section between the cades almost as a seperate fort. Defending with a tiny force is very easy since you can flag in and flag around to diff points in the forts.

2.0 is more about having your fort kinda defend itself for you while you're out doing other things. If you have a scout give a yell when a stone is under attack you'll get back in time to wipe at the first cade and hold till you can rebuild your stones. It's more about strategy and less like PvP than 1.0.

That is why it's typically unsuccessful on smaller servers (to my experience). A lot of guilds simply don't know how to play it and try to play it like it's 1.0. They lack the strat and coordination needed to take down a fort while defending one. People aren't so willing to adapt. I played on a few servers with 2.0. ONE had a successful 2.0 because people did adapt to it. The others were kinda funny actually. The guilds would sit in forts all WoE defending which wasn't needed. They defended like they were 1.0 forts and the small guild I was in went in and broke them in the last few minutes. We could have easily been stopped if they actually took the time to rebuild and flag around.

Sorry for the long post. I just can't stress enough that you don't need a large pop. It's just a different game. It's more about strat and making your fort work for you. It's more about mirco battles in multiple places than one big cluster**** in the emp room.