Alliance Point accumulation needs to be re-evaluated.

TheGrandAlliance · May 2014

lao wrote: »

seriously the existence of this thread shows EXACTLY whats wrong with todays mmo players and why their opinions and ideas should be discarded without 2nd thought.

.... says the Elite AP Farmer...

lao · May 2014

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

lao wrote: »

seriously the existence of this thread shows EXACTLY whats wrong with todays mmo players and why their opinions and ideas should be discarded without 2nd thought.

.... says the Elite AP Farmer...

you do realize PvPer and AP Farmer is the exactly same thing. dont fool urself into that delusional thought that u keep vaktens are PvPers.

TheGrandAlliance · May 2014

lao wrote: »

you do realize PvPer and AP Farmer is the exactly same thing. dont fool urself into that delusional thought that u keep vaktens are PvPers.

No... its called winning other players is PvP. The goal is to take the map... the other side is trying to stop you.

This isn't GW2's SPvP: This isn't Arena-based combat. Get over it E-sporter with his /elitewhine : "WAAAAAAAAAH! I ONLY WAN TO KILL PLAYERS WAAAAAAAAAAGN!"

lao · May 2014

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

lao wrote: »

you do realize PvPer and AP Farmer is the exactly same thing. dont fool urself into that delusional thought that u keep vaktens are PvPers.

No... its called winning other players is PvP. The goal is to take the map... the other side is trying to stop you.

This isn't GW2's SPvP: This isn't Arena-based combat. Get over it E-sporter with his /elitewhine : "WAAAAAAAAAH! I ONLY WAN TO KILL PLAYERS WAAAAAAAAAAGN!"

seriously can some mod remove this guys posting rights? his ridiculous bullcrap gives me brain tumors.

PvP = Player vs Player

nowhere does it mention walls, keeps or any of that crap. dno why im even argueing with this lemming. go join ur lemming zerg and donate some more AP to the wolves. its much appriciated.

TheGrandAlliance · May 2014

IT IS AN ALLIANCE WAR: PLAYERS ARE NOT THE ONLY MEMBERS OF THE ALLINACE(S)!!!! Is there PvE objectives in Cyrodiil? Yes.

Player vs Player doesn't mean literally: You can fight each other via the proxy of NPCs/"PvE situations".

FUtheremore there is NOWHERE that states that ZeniMax wanted pure player-only enviroment. Guilds/players like yours destroy this game's PvP: PLez take ur /elitewhine to another MMORPG.

lao · May 2014

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

Is there PvE objectives in Cyrodiil? Yes.

Player vs Player doesn't mean literally: You can fight each other via the proxy of NPCs/"PvE situations". Use ur head for once plz.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAKG-kbKeIo

didnt think i would ever post a vid twice in the same thread but this guy just begs for it.

Spawn · May 2014

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

Player vs Player doesn't mean literally: You can fight each other via the proxy of NPCs/"PvE situations"..

Wow... Them PvE Heroes

Anyways basically not much point posting in this thread, the creator doesn't understand exactly how the alliance point system works, all he is doing is being malicious calling anyone that plays the game to actually kill players a exploiting farmer, so disappointing.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

Spawn wrote: »

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

Player vs Player doesn't mean literally: You can fight each other via the proxy of NPCs/"PvE situations"..

Wow... Them PvE Heroes

Anyways basically not much point posting in this thread, the creator doesn't understand exactly how the alliance point system works, all he is doing is being malicious calling anyone that plays the game to actually kill players a exploiting farmer, so disappointing.

Not at all. As I have stated in the past, I come from a background of a variety of PvP MMORPGs. PvP is my favorite feature in the MMO genre, and I came to ESO specifically for AvA (Alliance versus Alliance). That is the one feature that sets ESO apart from any other current MMO on the market.

What I want is for PvP to actually be involved and further enhance the experiences of the tasks ZOS has given us. As it currently stands, many of these tasks are ignored or exploited for the benefit of a few trying to hijack a system for their own benefit.

I merely want to penalize abusers and reward those who actually play as intended. I find that to be rather reasonable.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

I already have a thread I started long ago that addresses this situation.

I have written a gread detail on the situation. What is worse: The current system rewards elite guilds AP farming... and not winning the map. I address this issue on another thread.

Indeed... the AP and Emperor needs change.

Nice to see someone else weighing in realizing that the current system is not working as intended. I just want people to actually care about AvA, Cyrodiil, and what is happening to their faction. The current system does not provide enough incentive and as a result many just ignore what actually matters because they can.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

xsorusb14_ESO wrote: »

You're aware Realm Points worked the same way Alliance Points worked in this game right?

Read more closely. ZOS has delivered on the RvR experience, unlike GW2 and others before it. Read the latter part of that sentence now, "where faction camaraderie and working as a team mattered in the PvP experience."

This is something that ZOS, themselves, have promised and discussed on a variety of occasions during pre-launch. Regardless of the faults DAoC may have had, ZOS' rhetoric is not matching their actions for ESO.

I'm merely pointing to the game that ZOS has stated they were making, and I'd like to see that philosophy reinforced in their game design. I am offering them potential solutions for reaching their goal and making AvA matter.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

lao wrote: »

no theres probably alot of zerglings like you who think alike. no1 that is a factor will agree with you tho.

Feel free to read more of the thread. I'm not just asking for a re-evaluation of AP gains through kills, but for it to become secondary and the main source of AP being gained through objectives.

Kills are obviously still important. There wouldn't be an incentive to leave your keeps and territory unguarded, especially if you are winning. However, ZOS needs to make the actual objectives matter instead of them being secondary towards players figuring out ways of farming other players.

That is not the objective of AvA.

cisadanepajsuxrwb17_ESO · May 2014

Encouraging massive zergs are actually pretty scary. It makes zergs becomes all more prominent and whoever has the biggest zergs have a higher chance of winning. While I agree that 2 zergs meeting head-on would be an amazing thing to be part of, we have to realize that there are actually a lot of players who really dislikes that.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

cisadanepajsuxrwb17_ESO wrote: »

Encouraging massive zergs are actually pretty scary. It makes zergs becomes all more prominent and whoever has the biggest zergs have a higher chance of winning. While I agree that 2 zergs meeting head-on would be an amazing thing to be part of, we have to realize that there are actually a lot of players who really dislikes that.

The game actually already encourages this. If you are part of a large party, and you want to generate decent AP, your best option is to find the largest battle and farm enemies for kills.

We already have this scenario of zerg wars being encouraged. What I want to do is make the experience less about blatant farming, and make objectives matter more.

There is no reason 80% of all the action should happen at only two keeps in Cyrodiil. It's far too large and there is too much territory to defend. People should be encouraged to attack different keeps as well as defend them.

Right now, players avoid objectives in favor of looking for kills, and while PvP is important, it should be organic and work with the system rather than being forced and being a detriment to the system.

Tintinabula · May 2014

I don't know about the size of the disparity being in check but it definitely makes sense that un grouped ppl without organized back up and support should receive a little more ap for a kill (especially when killing someone from a group who enjoys better support than they do.)

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

Tintinabula wrote: »

I don't know about the size of the disparity being in check but it definitely makes sense that un grouped ppl without organized back up and support should receive a little more ap for a kill (especially when killing someone from a group who enjoys better support than they do.)

If we are to keep the system purely based on killing for AP, I agree that solo players should receive more. I just do not agree they should receive nearly as much as they currently are, especially when they receive more AP than completing an elder scroll quest or capturing a keep.

If we turn the AP system towards objectives and perhaps make a flat rate for minor AP in kills, that could lead to more ideal conditions. There would be a lot less farming and more players actually playing the objectives, leading to natural and more emergent PvP.

Harakh · May 2014

Zerg should not be rewarded cause Zerging and large scale Fights (24 and more) is not so skilled like a 8vs8 or so.

If you will reward zerging no one will solo cause the scouts need also to get points.

DivinePo · May 2014

I think the risk/reward ratio regarding AP gain is good enough. Going around soloing is a lot more risky than running with a group (no matter what size) and should be rewarded big bigger prizes (as it is).
But running with a good group can potentially gain you more AP/h than running solo, since you can tackle harder challenges and engage other groups of players, when as a solo player you would have to skip such engagements due to their impossibility as a soloer (unless you are playing a super OP build).

rich_nicholsonb16_ESO · May 2014

I've said it many times, reduce the number of a group down, 24 is far to large.

Then make somekind if tagging system, group A starts hitting an enemy group and starts killing then group B comes along and helps but will only gain a low percent of the reward. This in turn will help smaller groups to gain nice rewards and will stop this horrible Zerg fest.

Make taking keeps more rewards since you will have to get more than 1 group together to take them so that reward isn't split.

Add small points around the map like stations, once taken it gives small buffs to your alliance. If anyone help defends these points you receive defence rewards split between your group ( lower the group more reward ) this won't stop zergs taking them but zergs won't stick around to defend and it won't be worth it.

Claimed keeps should give a bonus of defence for that guild , thus making that guild want to defend their keep instead of running off after they have claimed. This should also work for the supply places.

Porting can only be used after the keep has been claimed for a certain amount of time. This will also help reduce the Zerg fest and spread the action out more. It's beginning to feel like gw2 where ppl don't defend keeps they take them and move to the next, anyone dies durring the battle just ports straight away when that keep is taken.

If ppl want to Zerg let them but the rewards should be greatly reduced since it's easy mode, give the players who want to help their alliance but only want to small man something to do or give them greater rewards for what they do.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

Harakh wrote: »

Zerg should not be rewarded cause Zerging and large scale Fights (24 and more) is not so skilled like a 8vs8 or so.

If you will reward zerging no one will solo cause the scouts need also to get points.

That's not necessarily true. Having less players does not necessarily make one more skilled or a better player. Regardless, zerging is encouraged in a bad way with how the current system is based on AP. We could largely counteract this if AP gains were more objective-based.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

DivinePo wrote: »

I think the risk/reward ratio regarding AP gain is good enough. Going around soloing is a lot more risky than running with a group (no matter what size) and should be rewarded big bigger prizes (as it is).
But running with a good group can potentially gain you more AP/h than running solo, since you can tackle harder challenges and engage other groups of players, when as a solo player you would have to skip such engagements due to their impossibility as a soloer (unless you are playing a super OP build).

The truth of the matter is the smaller groups or solo players are playing the OP builds. These were your sorcerer vampires who were 1v30 players and more before the nerfs started rolling in.

I believe killing as a main source of AP should largely be discouraged. The true focus should be on objectives, with killing playing a secondary role. Contributing towards objectives, especially if they are as significant as a keep or an elder scroll should elicit the biggest rewards.

Imperator_Clydus · May 2014

rich_nicholsonb16_ESO wrote: »

I've said it many times, reduce the number of a group down, 24 is far to large.

Then make somekind if tagging system, group A starts hitting an enemy group and starts killing then group B comes along and helps but will only gain a low percent of the reward. This in turn will help smaller groups to gain nice rewards and will stop this horrible Zerg fest.

Make taking keeps more rewards since you will have to get more than 1 group together to take them so that reward isn't split.

Add small points around the map like stations, once taken it gives small buffs to your alliance. If anyone help defends these points you receive defence rewards split between your group ( lower the group more reward ) this won't stop zergs taking them but zergs won't stick around to defend and it won't be worth it.

Claimed keeps should give a bonus of defence for that guild , thus making that guild want to defend their keep instead of running off after they have claimed. This should also work for the supply places.

Porting can only be used after the keep has been claimed for a certain amount of time. This will also help reduce the Zerg fest and spread the action out more. It's beginning to feel like gw2 where ppl don't defend keeps they take them and move to the next, anyone dies durring the battle just ports straight away when that keep is taken.

If ppl want to Zerg let them but the rewards should be greatly reduced since it's easy mode, give the players who want to help their alliance but only want to small man something to do or give them greater rewards for what they do.

I think small group should definitely still be viable, just not the best option. Again, I think making objectives the focus rather than kills would go along way. I think players should be free to either pursue large or small groups, but the more you contribute objectively, the more you should accumulate in the end.

This could even out for a small group if they take a lot of resources and cut transitus, versus a larger group taking a keep or an outpost, for example. There would also be great incentives to defend keeps, outposts, and resources as they would generate defensive AP gains.

I liked your idea about guilds gaining more for claiming these objectives, as it would provide more incentive for defending what is yours. As it currently stands, much like you suggested, players currently just zerg from one keep to the next. This should be discouraged for more dynamic and unpredictable PvP.

DivinePo · May 2014

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

DivinePo wrote: »

I think the risk/reward ratio regarding AP gain is good enough. Going around soloing is a lot more risky than running with a group (no matter what size) and should be rewarded big bigger prizes (as it is).
But running with a good group can potentially gain you more AP/h than running solo, since you can tackle harder challenges and engage other groups of players, when as a solo player you would have to skip such engagements due to their impossibility as a soloer (unless you are playing a super OP build).

The truth of the matter is the smaller groups or solo players are playing the OP builds. These were your sorcerer vampires who were 1v30 players and more before the nerfs started rolling in.

I believe killing as a main source of AP should largely be discouraged. The true focus should be on objectives, with killing playing a secondary role. Contributing towards objectives, especially if they are as significant as a keep or an elder scroll should elicit the biggest rewards.

I agree with you on the matter that completing objectives (defending keeps, capturing scrolls etc.) should reward the contributing players better. The current system does indeed encourage killing as the main source of AP too much. That is one of the reasons groups will start farming kills when they get a scroll, rather than actually taking it to a keep asap, as the game doesn't directly reward for said action.

Mendoze · May 2014

I think current system works quite well. I usually play in a group, and I think I get decent AP gains from my participation. Anyone of us can run around solo or in small pack, but I just like bigger battles personally. Of course I passionately hate these small group hunting packs, who so often seem to find me solo, but also I understand that they are really doing a good job by harassing enemy reinforcements.

Only thing that currently irks me in AvA is how emperors are selected. Current system just promotes solo farming so much, that I haven't even seen our side emperor....ever. Enemy emperor I saw plenty when he was running in mistform and his bat swarm, so I must think our side emperor is the same....not sure though. But that's not the point. I'd rather see emperors that are leaders for their side, rather than some solo hunters, so maybe we could have some keep capture points or something, so those people who actually lead would become emperors.

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO · May 2014

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

Greetings members of The Elder Scrolls Online community,

ESO is an extremely community-driven experience. Whether we look at public dungeons, group dungeons, crafting, overland bosses, dark anchors, AvA, guild banks, guild stores, veteran areas and soon to be Adventure Zones, having friends and being social can go a long way to one's success.

This is common practice and honestly is expected in an MMORPG. In regards to AvA, however, ZOS's philosophy of grouping doesn't apply nearly as well. For those who may not know already, the way alliance points are currently accumulated in AvA is incredibly contradicting.

Here is the issue. Alliance Points are predominantly gained by killing other players. The less players who happen to be in your group, the more alliance points you will receive per kill. Now, theoretically speaking, this makes sense. Being in a large group would mean it should be easier to kill players, hence easier to accumulate alliance points.

While in most cases this is true, the issue lies within the percentage disparity between a large group of 24 players, versus a solo player. For instance, a full, large group will receive approximately eight alliance points per player killed. In contrast, a solo player will receive approximately eight hundred alliance points per player killed.

Now, it shouldn't take a rocket scientist to realize a hundred times increase in AP for solo players doesn't make a lot of sense for AvA. The reason I say this is because AvA is Alliance versus Alliance. It is a large, open world, massive PvP experience where hundreds, if not thousands of players, are fighting each other for control over Cyrodiil.

What the current AP system currently does is promotes and encourages smaller groups and solo players vastly over large groups. I enjoy leading large group parties on my campaign. Yesterday alone, my group claimed most of the keeps in Cyrodiil throughout the day. Unfortunately, one does not receive a lot of AP for claiming keeps.

Unless the keep, itself, is actually defended, playing tactically and having foresight actually works against one with how AvA currently works. Besides myself, every single emperor for the DC has either been a solo player or played in small groups, farming kills to generate a colossal amount of AP.

This mentality, in my personal opinion, is bad for AvA. The experience should be focused on defending keeps, securing elder scrolls, and claiming territory. Pure death matching should be a secondary component that doesn't lead to better rewards and benefits.

Especially with how large and massive AvA is, with hundreds of players participating in sieges, it should be these players who accumulate the most AP. As it currently stands, the large groups AvA was built for do not even compare to small groups and solo players. For an MMORPG, that is an incredibly confusing and frustrating predicament.

Am I the only individual who believes the AP system needs to be reassessed and that large groups should be encouraged rather than discouraged? Please post your thoughts as I personally understood AvA to be about faction camaraderie and unity, not solo play and grinding kills disregarding the alliance war as a whole.

I am eager to hear everyone's thoughts on AP accumulation and hopefully ZOS will continue to tweak and refine the great system that AvA truly is.

Regards,

Imperator Clydus

The AP's are useless in the first place, you get all your pvp "goodies" from the skill trees preaty early on. You get plenty of AP to buy siege engines (the only use for AP's atm) and unless you really really really really want purple jewels (625k each) you preaty much got nothing to spend them on.

If it was up2 me i would simply make all skills avaible to everyone and simply remove the AP gains. This should keep people that enjoy the PvP aspect in AvA and not force anyone else to "grind" the AP's.

lao · May 2014

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

Spawn wrote: »

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

Player vs Player doesn't mean literally: You can fight each other via the proxy of NPCs/"PvE situations"..

Wow... Them PvE Heroes

Anyways basically not much point posting in this thread, the creator doesn't understand exactly how the alliance point system works, all he is doing is being malicious calling anyone that plays the game to actually kill players a exploiting farmer, so disappointing.

Not at all. As I have stated in the past, I come from a background of a variety of PvP MMORPGs. PvP is my favorite feature in the MMO genre, and I came to ESO specifically for AvA (Alliance versus Alliance). That is the one feature that sets ESO apart from any other current MMO on the market.

What I want is for PvP to actually be involved and further enhance the experiences of the tasks ZOS has given us. As it currently stands, many of these tasks are ignored or exploited for the benefit of a few trying to hijack a system for their own benefit.

I merely want to penalize abusers and reward those who actually play as intended. I find that to be rather reasonable.

PvPing is abusing now. man those new times we live in -.-

lao · May 2014

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

lao wrote: »

no theres probably alot of zerglings like you who think alike. no1 that is a factor will agree with you tho.

Feel free to read more of the thread. I'm not just asking for a re-evaluation of AP gains through kills, but for it to become secondary and the main source of AP being gained through objectives.

Kills are obviously still important. There wouldn't be an incentive to leave your keeps and territory unguarded, especially if you are winning. However, ZOS needs to make the actual objectives matter instead of them being secondary towards players figuring out ways of farming other players.

That is not the objective of AvA.

if ZOS listened to you every single real PvPer would leave the game instantly and u would be alone with the other lemmings. but i guess that is what u want.

kills have to be the primary source of AP else its not PvP. the way it is atm is already way too much PvWall/NPC. the whole concept they use is flawed and ppl are already getting bored of it, which i btw already warned about in beta.

what they should do instead is remove all the keeps/npc´s entirely and crown emperors on a king of the hill basis. the player that has accumulated the most AP in a given time period should be crowned emperor. kinda like it is already but without the crutch of taking/defending keeps that gives bad palyers more AP then they deserve. also the fact that u have to own specific keeps in order to become emperor is extremely dumb. if those were removed we would see alot more small scale pvp as there would be no point in running in a zerg and only actually good players/groups would have an actual chance to become emperor. like its supposed to be.

no offense but the view this modern generation of mmo players has on how pvp is supposed to be or what they actually think is pvp makes me sick to the stomach. u couldnt be further off of reality.

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO · May 2014

lao wrote: »

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

lao wrote: »

no theres probably alot of zerglings like you who think alike. no1 that is a factor will agree with you tho.

Feel free to read more of the thread. I'm not just asking for a re-evaluation of AP gains through kills, but for it to become secondary and the main source of AP being gained through objectives.

Kills are obviously still important. There wouldn't be an incentive to leave your keeps and territory unguarded, especially if you are winning. However, ZOS needs to make the actual objectives matter instead of them being secondary towards players figuring out ways of farming other players.

That is not the objective of AvA.

if ZOS listened to you every single real PvPer would leave the game instantly and u would be alone with the other lemmings. but i guess that is what u want.

kills have to be the primary source of AP else its not PvP. the way it is atm is already way too much PvWall/NPC. the whole concept they use is flawed and ppl are already getting bored of it, which i btw already warned about in beta.

what they should do instead is remove all the keeps/npc´s entirely and crown emperors on a king of the hill basis. the player that has accumulated the most AP in a given time period should be crowned emperor. kinda like it is already but without the crutch of taking/defending keeps that gives bad palyers more AP then they deserve. also the fact that u have to own specific keeps in order to become emperor is extremely dumb. if those were removed we would see alot more small scale pvp as there would be no point in running in a zerg and only actually good players/groups would have an actual chance to become emperor. like its supposed to be.

no offense but the view this modern generation of mmo players has on how pvp is supposed to be or what they actually think is pvp makes me sick to the stomach. u couldnt be further off of reality.

Altrough i mostly agree with what you say i stil think that defending/atacking keeps has the potential of being a fun part of pvp

the AP should stil be rewarded entirely for player contribution not ticks on keep or stuff like that...

lao · May 2014

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO wrote: »

lao wrote: »

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

lao wrote: »

no theres probably alot of zerglings like you who think alike. no1 that is a factor will agree with you tho.

Feel free to read more of the thread. I'm not just asking for a re-evaluation of AP gains through kills, but for it to become secondary and the main source of AP being gained through objectives.

Kills are obviously still important. There wouldn't be an incentive to leave your keeps and territory unguarded, especially if you are winning. However, ZOS needs to make the actual objectives matter instead of them being secondary towards players figuring out ways of farming other players.

That is not the objective of AvA.

if ZOS listened to you every single real PvPer would leave the game instantly and u would be alone with the other lemmings. but i guess that is what u want.

kills have to be the primary source of AP else its not PvP. the way it is atm is already way too much PvWall/NPC. the whole concept they use is flawed and ppl are already getting bored of it, which i btw already warned about in beta.

what they should do instead is remove all the keeps/npc´s entirely and crown emperors on a king of the hill basis. the player that has accumulated the most AP in a given time period should be crowned emperor. kinda like it is already but without the crutch of taking/defending keeps that gives bad palyers more AP then they deserve. also the fact that u have to own specific keeps in order to become emperor is extremely dumb. if those were removed we would see alot more small scale pvp as there would be no point in running in a zerg and only actually good players/groups would have an actual chance to become emperor. like its supposed to be.

no offense but the view this modern generation of mmo players has on how pvp is supposed to be or what they actually think is pvp makes me sick to the stomach. u couldnt be further off of reality.

Altrough i mostly agree with what you say i stil think that defending/atacking keeps has the potential of being a fun part of pvp the AP should stil be rewarded entirely for player contribution not ticks on keep or stuff like that...

yea i can agree on that. if there was a reward for actual contribution then its alright but giving ppl ticks for just beeing in the general area is stupid. i remember when i rode past a keep that previously had been under attack and all of a sudden i got 11k AP. i was like wtf is this? i didnt take part in the fight at all and got randomly awarded with a crapton of AP. thats just silly

Bergs · May 2014

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

Harakh wrote: »

Zerg should not be rewarded cause Zerging and large scale Fights (24 and more) is not so skilled like a 8vs8 or so.

If you will reward zerging no one will solo cause the scouts need also to get points.

That's not necessarily true. Having less players does not necessarily make one more skilled or a better player. Regardless, zerging is encouraged in a bad way with how the current system is based on AP. We could largely counteract this if AP gains were more objective-based.

Sorry bud, this was tried in Warhammer Online and it created avoidance in PvP with the trading of objectives.

The current system seems fine to me. Plus there already exists bonuses for objectives for attacking/defending them from players. Seems like a decent compromise to me.

Spawn · May 2014

So playing objectives today with a group of around 20 for most of the day gained me 715k ap today, so big groups don't have a issue with gaining ap.

Oh and well look what happened to Bloodthorn, we turned the whole map yellow well DC had 3 Bars and EP had 2 Bars of Pop well Ad was only at 1 you see a effective large group can do a lot mate, guess it would have been better for you if we just kept trying to farm kills.

You see the system as it stands works perfectly well, a group like mine can make massive alliance points, attacking and defending objectives with any size group, small or big we just make sure we are as effective as our big group is, the current system is prefect it makes you attack players not go around back capping undefended keeps.

You can be salty about it as much as you want but after today you clearly can see how effective a large group can be and just how much alliance points we can get in a day on top of how much map control.