Graalians - View Single Post

deadowl · 04-15-2015

I'm offering this post as an alternative to the current guild tower system. After reading Rufus' thread which polled whether or not the current number of forts is okay, I saw a lot of issues brought up about the guild tower system.

From what I've read: It seems that the same guilds occupy the same towers for extremely long periods of time, and in a dominating fashion. If they exceed the point where there are no more rewards left, the dominant guilds disband and regroup into a new guild. The guilds at different towers also seem to have truces in place not to attack one another.

For these reasons, it is my conclusion that there are systemic issues in the guild tower system that detract from gameplay for all but the most elite.

After the first server wipe of Classic, I reintroduced the MoD guild fort with a new tower system. This is an outline of the system I implemented, and it contrasted with the previous system (note that the previous system is practically equivalent with the present system). There were rarely many players after the server wipe, so not many had the privelege to play this implementation of the tower. However, I will say that when towering did occur, I found it absolutely intense.

The previous system was brought back for some reason or another, and is what you presently see on iClassic. The only gameplay difference for the iClassic towering system from the first towering system (which wasn't particularly popular) is that there is now a reward for holding the tower for extended periods of time.

This was my system. The entire premise of gameplay required only 35 lines of code, albeit with respawns handled separately.

Towering is broken down into discrete rounds in which only one guild may come out on top. Previously there had been no reward system, such as the current hats system, and I figured a victory tally would be a decent reward.
There is a delay between rounds of a fixed period of time. This allows everyone to reorient themselves and prepare for the next round. In my implementation it was 15 seconds.
In order to win, you must maintain flag ownership for a fixed period of time. This allows for a round to come to an end. An alternative to this could decrease the time required as the round progresses. In my implementation it was 120 seconds.
One sword hit to the flag changes its ownership. Because of this, you can never know who is going to win the round until the very end, which endows this alternative with a great deal of intensity.

Do you think this alternate system would be an improvement over the current system? Do you see any challenges with the alternate system? Other thoughts?

04-15-2015	1
deadowl Registered User Join Date: Jul 2014 Posts: 783	Alternate Guild Tower System I'm offering this post as an alternative to the current guild tower system. After reading Rufus' thread which polled whether or not the current number of forts is okay, I saw a lot of issues brought up about the guild tower system. From what I've read: It seems that the same guilds occupy the same towers for extremely long periods of time, and in a dominating fashion. If they exceed the point where there are no more rewards left, the dominant guilds disband and regroup into a new guild. The guilds at different towers also seem to have truces in place not to attack one another. For these reasons, it is my conclusion that there are systemic issues in the guild tower system that detract from gameplay for all but the most elite. After the first server wipe of Classic, I reintroduced the MoD guild fort with a new tower system. This is an outline of the system I implemented, and it contrasted with the previous system (note that the previous system is practically equivalent with the present system). There were rarely many players after the server wipe, so not many had the privelege to play this implementation of the tower. However, I will say that when towering did occur, I found it absolutely intense. The previous system was brought back for some reason or another, and is what you presently see on iClassic. The only gameplay difference for the iClassic towering system from the first towering system (which wasn't particularly popular) is that there is now a reward for holding the tower for extended periods of time. This was my system. The entire premise of gameplay required only 35 lines of code, albeit with respawns handled separately. Towering is broken down into discrete rounds in which only one guild may come out on top. Previously there had been no reward system, such as the current hats system, and I figured a victory tally would be a decent reward. There is a delay between rounds of a fixed period of time. This allows everyone to reorient themselves and prepare for the next round. In my implementation it was 15 seconds. In order to win, you must maintain flag ownership for a fixed period of time. This allows for a round to come to an end. An alternative to this could decrease the time required as the round progresses. In my implementation it was 120 seconds. One sword hit to the flag changes its ownership. Because of this, you can never know who is going to win the round until the very end, which endows this alternative with a great deal of intensity. Do you think this alternate system would be an improvement over the current system? Do you see any challenges with the alternate system? Other thoughts?