Will these arrangements re-balance Guild Warfare and Championship Warfare?

[MisChief]

Find a strategy to work it out instead of complaining. This game is not only about being a super power and spending money. If your guild is any good, it will adapt. Most ubber guilds are good at that (otherwise they wouldn't be where they are). And baseball is boring.

This is not affecting the "uber guilds", it is affecting the small ones, the normal guilds. We often have 4-5 fights to defend. It's not allowing defense to work in any fashion that is manageable if 2 alts can take out your big guys you put in to defend. Put more you may say, well we don't have more. I would really like for people to stop making assumptions on this unless you have personally been in a GW and seen exactly how this is working, particularly on the defensive end.

[MisChief]

I have been doing some thinking on Alts. In most cases the players that have alts do not dedicate the time to 'grow' them, but they do log on. This means that players that do log on frequently but do not increase in power and rank, or increase very slowly, and are below some specified power (maybe 4 mil or so) can be assumed to be Alts. If this is the case then it should be fairly simple for the game to identify them.

Just to make things clear, I believe that a player that has all of the following characteristics is an alt (see exception below).

1. Logs on to the game several times a week.
2. Is below 4 mil power (or some other number).
3. Power and rank increase very slowly or not at all.

Using this description infrequent players would not be identifies as alts because they do not log on several times a week. Only the players that log on frequently but do not grow would be identified as alts.

Using this definition the only players may be labeled as Alts but in fact are not would be the 'social' players. The one that use the game for chatting and not to play. But if 'social' players are considered Alts got game mechanics (like GW battles) it will not hurt them because they are not really playing the game.

Be very careful to pigeonhole accts. We have members who work, who can only get on a few hours a day and a bit on weekends. They may be new and learning. Some alt accts are big, they are built. Don't assume this is always the case. I think stop focusing on what is an alt or not, and look at the function of the "new" system in GW. Small accts are given too much power and big accts have been stripped of theirs. It's not working as is.

[Andy]

Be very careful to pigeonhole accts. We have members who work, who can only get on a few hours a day and a bit on weekends. They may be new and learning. Some alt accts are big, they are built. Don't assume this is always the case. I think stop focusing on what is an alt or not, and look at the function of the "new" system in GW. Small accts are given too much power and big accts have been stripped of theirs. It's not working as is.

But those members that can only be on for several hours a week will still show steady growth, so they will not be classified as alts. Also note that I did not say to block them from the game, but that some of the game mechanics, like the new GW reduction on durability to the winner, would not apply if the looser is classified as an alt.

[ChickenWing]

This is not affecting the "uber guilds", it is affecting the small ones, the normal guilds. We often have 4-5 fights to defend. It's not allowing defense to work in any fashion that is manageable if 2 alts can take out your big guys you put in to defend. Put more you may say, well we don't have more. I would really like for people to stop making assumptions on this unless you have personally been in a GW and seen exactly how this is working, particularly on the defensive end.

You are bringing up another interesting perspective. What if you are NOT inthe the ubber guild?

The ubber guild, which owns alt guilds on most servers, will attack those guilds. And if they own 4-5 cities, as in Michief's case, they suffer from 20%-30% buff on the enemy's side. Is it a big deal? I'm not sure it is. But it's worth discussing. Perhaps you can relate your GW experience a little more.

[erinpyre_2745376]

[/U]2.
Disallow players who have the same IP and/or MAC address from logging in more than 1 avatar in the same guild wars city battle.

My boys and I both play tynon on the same laptop how would this affect it?[/QUOTE]

Yes, lugnut it most definitely would. Most people complaining about alts HAVE alts on the game themselves. They used to have them to steal maps from back when you got 1 map and 3 sails guaranteed per server day. Now that that has changed, alts are not just expendable map factories for players. Instead, someone with a "main" toon and an "alt" can begin investing in the progress of the alt as well as the main. Consequently, this then makes guilds that are built soley on cash all the more able to keep down any player that is making his or her way with little or no money to invest in building an account on the game. And it is likely with this sort of habitual win-win environment for those with deep wallets even bank accounts devoted to providing more and more cash funding to play this game, from which the outrage will come, because those people have thousands of dollars tied up in this game, and they rather see a change that keeps them from being on top in every event, every activity, every moment on the server on which they play, as a breach of actual contract on the part of tynon. Therefore, anyone who does NOT spend tons of money to build their own toons up, will become a victim of circumstance. Including those that have no "alts" and are not, as it is termed, "coiners" on the game. Sorry

[ChickenWing]

Someone on my server has perhaps 10 or 20 alts. I don't know the number, but I know this person has a lot. This person hasn't spent a dime on the game, yet is in the top 5 of the server. The reason? Farming alts for coins and credits. This allows this person to save up gems instead of using them in the shrine, and thus to use them on Thor's day at will. Holding coin cities is irrelevant to this person. Alts are WAY too powerful now that they can get incredible amounts from CW tickets. On revenge day, it can easily go up to 10M coins per alt.

[erinpyre_2745376]

Not real sure where you came up with the 1:4 ratio. It's 5 lost if you win and 10 lost if you loose. That's 1:2.



Not too sure who said every server has one mega guild. Our server has 3 guilds that seem to trade cities fairly regularly. That said, I think loosing 5 durability for a win is too much. As has already been said, it allows a few alts to totally change the outcome of a battle. I didn't like the rationale they used when they added it, and now that I've seen it in action, I like it less.

Every server doesn't have mega guilds. That was said by a member that got into a mega guild $upreme as they call themselves. I was there too until recently when a vh broke the TOS. I guess in mega guilds though, that's allowed because they pay for the privilege to do whatever they want to whomever they want whenever they feel like it. And yes, they are very not happy no longer owning everything on the game after 4 months of dominating it. Considering the amount of money just that one guild spends per day on the game, I can safely assume they along with other guilds that spend that amount of "coin" see tynon making it less possible for them to hold everything hostage and in their ultimate grasp as a breach of contract on tynon's part.

[Jewels]

This is not affecting the "uber guilds", it is affecting the small ones, the normal guilds. We often have 4-5 fights to defend. It's not allowing defense to work in any fashion that is manageable if 2 alts can take out your big guys you put in to defend. Put more you may say, well we don't have more. I would really like for people to stop making assumptions on this unless you have personally been in a GW and seen exactly how this is working, particularly on the defensive end.

I'm thinking this will be become a Attackers GW's with cities swapping every night - Defense seems impossible.
we took back 1 of the coin cities we lost last night (lost 3 last night out of 4 wars)

We gave away 2 rep cities tonight bringing us down to 6 cities now -
why try to defend? the way it looks we will not be able to Defend a city until we drop a few more.

Our guild is cool on sharing the cities -
but at the time when we got those coin cities? we were the #2 guild on the server - we fought hard, strategy was key to winning those cities and keeping them.
We only have 2-3 bigger spenders - and nothing in the Uber-PR territory, so Tynon giving em away to Attackers kinda burns...

Just looks like its gonna be - GW Swap Meet nightly at 8pm

Now if we can only get rid of Koleton ;p

[japerdog50_9329163]

Alot of servers are different, and no matter what they do there will always be at least one person who is unhappy. Even if a higher guild losses a city to a small guild they can easily take it back. Its not like you can never get the city back. You just wont have complete control over the server.

[Cuddles_1461020]

Only the players that log on frequently but do not grow would be identified as alts.

Using this definition the only players may be labeled as Alts but in fact are not would be the 'social' players. The one that use the game for chatting and not to play. But if 'social' players are considered Alts got game mechanics (like GW battles) it will not hurt them because they are not really playing the game.

This is correct. (at least according to OUR server).