Maintenance for the week of April 13:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 13
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 13
How to Fix the Emperorship
Grim13
✭✭✭✭✭
✭
✭
When the NA Thornblade Campaign kicked off one of the more prominent AD Guilds selfishly went and sat at Bleaker's, farming AP, in a race to become crown-able as Emperor.
This angered a lot of the other guilds who were busy being pushed back, while heavily out numbered, because they were attempting to play the objectives.
Tonight's efforts were thwarted by the animosity and infighting inside the AD. Several Guilds are even flat out refusing to help this certain Guild as some form of tribal justice.
I find it difficult to disagree.
Problem is: the very way Emperor is decided feeds into these types of selfish behaviors... and unless it's modified... this type of BS will most likely always occur.
My solution:
1) Make the Player chosen as Emperor have to be physically present at a minimum of 4 out of the 6 Emp Keeps while they're being taken... to siege completion.
2) Make it so that the Player chosen as Emperor is the Player who accumulated the most AP during the battle for those 4 of 6 Keeps.
3) Allow the calculation of total AP earned towards becoming Emperor to also include the 1 to 2 other Keeps beyond the minimum 4.
This way, there's:
1) Less incentive for Groups to go off farming AP.
2) More incentive to play the actual objectives.
3) Even if some do go off to farm AP... it will have less of an effect on the Players who prefer to play as part of a team.
This angered a lot of the other guilds who were busy being pushed back, while heavily out numbered, because they were attempting to play the objectives.
Tonight's efforts were thwarted by the animosity and infighting inside the AD. Several Guilds are even flat out refusing to help this certain Guild as some form of tribal justice.
I find it difficult to disagree.
Problem is: the very way Emperor is decided feeds into these types of selfish behaviors... and unless it's modified... this type of BS will most likely always occur.
My solution:
1) Make the Player chosen as Emperor have to be physically present at a minimum of 4 out of the 6 Emp Keeps while they're being taken... to siege completion.
2) Make it so that the Player chosen as Emperor is the Player who accumulated the most AP during the battle for those 4 of 6 Keeps.
3) Allow the calculation of total AP earned towards becoming Emperor to also include the 1 to 2 other Keeps beyond the minimum 4.
This way, there's:
1) Less incentive for Groups to go off farming AP.
2) More incentive to play the actual objectives.
3) Even if some do go off to farm AP... it will have less of an effect on the Players who prefer to play as part of a team.
0
-
KBKB✭✭✭✭✭
✭When the NA Thornblade Campaign kicked off one of the more prominent AD Guilds selfishly went and sat at Bleaker's, farming AP, in a race to become crown-able as Emperor.
This angered a lot of the other guilds who were busy being pushed back, while heavily out numbered, because they were attempting to play the objectives.
Tonight's efforts were thwarted by the animosity and infighting inside the AD. Several Guilds are even flat out refusing to help this certain Guild as some form of tribal justice.
I find it difficult to disagree.
Problem is: the very way Emperor is decided feeds into these types of selfish behaviors... and unless it's modified... this type of BS will most likely always occur.
My solution:
1) Make the Player chosen as Emperor have to be physically present at a minimum of 4 out of the 6 Emp Keeps while they're being taken... to siege completion.
2) Make it so that the Player chosen as Emperor is the Player who accumulated the most AP during the battle for those 4 of 6 Keeps.
3) Allow the calculation of total AP earned towards becoming Emperor to also include the 1 to 2 other Keeps beyond the minimum 4.
This way, there's:
1) Less incentive for Groups to go off farming AP.
2) More incentive to play the actual objectives.
3) Even if some do go off to farm AP... it will have less of an effect on the Players who prefer to play as part of a team.
Unfair to the guy whom PvPs his heart out on a *** camp for his faction then logs off while others take the 6 keeps. Also it can take a very short time or hours upon hours to get the 6 imp keeps, its implausible to suggest they should be there for 4/6 sieges or no crown. It should just be a lock out for a week after you lose your emp title.0 -
xaraan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I don't understand what the issue is with them farming up there personally. They did the same thing before in wabba (if I'm thinking of the right group) and it was beneficial to have them drawing some heat away while we took stuff over.-- @xaraan --
nightblade: Xaraan • templar: Xaraan-dar • dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus • necromancer: Xaraan-qa • warden: Xaraanodon • sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
AD • NA • PC0 -
Shaggygaming✭✭✭Emperor was a great idea on paper, but it is a horrible design in game. I'm not sure what @ZOS_BrianWheeler had to be thinking to let emperor farming continue and even allowed hundreds of people to exploit emperor on dead campaign while they could clearly see alliances working together flipping keeps. Not only that but why in the world does @ZOS_BrianWheeler think it is okay for people from DEAD campaigns keep their campaign buffs in full campaigns? Does anyone at all see any reason why that is okay?Edited by Shaggygaming on August 7, 2014 4:45PM1
