correct the problem with the time of territorial wars

Options
dintra07
dintra07 Posts: 1 Arc User
edited March 2013 in Suggestion Box
Please fix the time of TW (territorial wars). Make it impossible to attack one faction at one time by several factions, because it's unreal to survive 5 attacks. Minimal gap between the TW's should be at least an hour. Or fix guild capacity limit: 5-6 attacks x 80 players (max number of people on TW) = at least 400-500 people should be in a faction to keep the territories at the same time.
Post edited by dintra07 on

Comments

  • slamstone
    slamstone Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Options
    english pls b:victory a worthy QQ needs to be at least understandable...and tw times are good as they are tyvm...if you're not strong/smart enough to keep 5-6 territories then u shouldn't have them in the 1st place.
  • Flarephoenix - Dreamweaver
    Flarephoenix - Dreamweaver Posts: 26 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Options
    The 200 member maximum capacity works just fine, just as the 'up to 7-way gank' potential in TW does. If a faction cannot defend the lands it holds then it deserves to lose some opening room for other factions to be on the map or expand their holdings.

    If the capacity was increased, the number of attacks decreased or time-shifted that would encourage and allow top factions to take and hold more of the map which would just be a return to the days when one or two factions held the majority of the map and there was little to no room for other factions.
  • SylenThunder - Twilight Temple
    edited March 2013
    Options
    While it's nice that you took the time to actually speak coherently now, you could just edit your first post instead of re-posting.

    In the end though, Flarephoenix is correct. It is intended to be like that. I remember when the limit was 3 with the old TW times. Solid-colored maps make for extremely boring TW weekends.

    The way it is now, allows for much more diversity in the map. It means more TW fun for all.
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
  • opkossy
    opkossy Posts: 11,177 Community Moderator
    edited March 2013
    Options
    This is a suggestion so it shall be moved there.

    As for the TW attacks, it's as intended to diversify TW and keep it more interesting. If a faction is strong enough to defend all those lands, more power to them. If not, then at least it's not the days of old where a single faction could have the entire map uncontested with the limit of lands that could be attacked only helping said faction.
    (Insert fancy image here)
    image
  • dintra07
    dintra07 Posts: 1 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Options
  • Melindasa - Raging Tide
    Melindasa - Raging Tide Posts: 138 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Options
    dintra07 wrote: »


    this made my day b:cuteb:laugh
    Any statement of yours should I consider invalid unless you add ''turtle'' among your lines b:mischievous
  • Runemine - Dreamweaver
    Runemine - Dreamweaver Posts: 572 Arc User
    edited March 2013
    Options
    Lol i like it this way though increasing faction member cap would be nice. Heck we had 4 fights today, surprised its not 5 and most likely will only lose 1 land or none. Its make it fun with the thrill of holding of that many people.

    Most large TW faction (At least in my server) are not large in number usually 1-3 with rest smaller factions so you can easily have 1 large faction defend again 1 large faction and 3-4 small ones as long as the player ACTUALLY ATTEND FOR TW. Which meh harder now and days yes unless the faction takes action.

    Overall good as is and id actually would want multi defends to spice things up.
    101 Blademaster(Pro/Fail 4.0 BM with 11k base HP+G16(+10))
    100 Seeker(The Vortex Beast)
    86 Assassin(Solo king)
    76 Archer(Squishy Nuker)
    72 Cleric(Horrible healer)
    67 Barb(Buff baby)
    61 Wizard(King Aoe)
    37 Mystic(Fun project)