Kingdom Wars Revamp: The Islands+


#41

I’m really not in the frame of mind this evening to hash out all the details. Those were my thoughts on how it should be approached, or maybe some alternative options to discuss. None were specifically suggestions on how to “improve” your idea.

I understand your rationale on limiting it to three, but I think that may still leave sandbaggers - maybe there is nothing that can ever be done about that, though. Maybe three is enough. If nothing else, it is a starting point. If they try it and find out that allowing more teams would be better, they can change it.

I think there should be fewer monuments than teams, thus insuring that three teams don’t just agree to split the profits and settle. Make it a little more interesting.

As far as when teams can enter, there is probably nothing that can be done to make it fair for all in a way in which no one will complain. Again, just throwing out a suggestion - something to think about…

I will say again that I think it is a great idea. I’d be for just about anything that makes this event even remotely entertaining.


#42

That is way too much like Fight Pits. I don’t like the idea of rounds and resetting. That doesn’t solve the problems of the event, it just turns it into a different event.


#43

Maybe instead of “claiming” it, they put in a “request”? If another team manages to surpass them before the CI opens, and it also “requests” that tile, they can get in instead? Make it kind of like a silent auction - you stake your claim on one of the three starting points, but if another team also stakes it, then the team with the higher points wins it.

Just a thought…


#44

Oh I like that a lot!


#45

Why exactly would 1 team want to go to it by themselves? There would be nobody to attack except Gustav bases. Presumably, the team that would have the option to go there first would already be in first. So why bother? What “massive rewards” are there that they don’t already possess except now only being able to attack Gustav bases? You would have to perfectly time the gateway to decide to go where 4 or 5 teams would be hitting it at the same time so a team could be penalized by their indecisiveness. I just don’t see that happening.

They do. They can go crazy right from the beginning to try and secure the top 5 or they can slow roll it.

I just don’t see how giving the team the “choice” when they randomly reach a point threshold as solving anything as teams would reach it at different times and one team may have a giant head start where it just wouldn’t pay for the team to go there and face Gustav bases the rest of the event.

If anything regarding “choice”, I could see at the end of day 2 going down the leaderboard and have a delayed start so everyone starts on the island the same time. Since the start time would be delayed, it would give each team a chance to answer. Ask every team regardless of rank if they’d like to go to the CI. Then at the start of the CI, if the team ranked 1 at the time says yes, they go. Keep going down the leaderboard til the slots are full.


#46

See my second post where @DRintheSky came up with a great idea and I quoted him on it and condensed this.

See above.

See above.

Disagree.

See the above stuff with DR. You missed a huge convo on this.


#47

Still not going to get the full amount of time I want to spend on this as I spent too much time hunting tonight, but will throw some ideas out anyways…

  • One thing I hate about KW is how it locks you into fighting just a few opponents for days on end. Add in that you’re best served by attacking the max point value base a bajillion times and the repetition is mind numbing.
  • As already mentioned, the map compounds this by making it so those few teams you fight may be significantly stronger than you. No other PvP does this - Gauntlet matches teams near each other in rank, Fight Pits is separated by pit, Temple Raid is a free for all that imho doesn’t even qualify as a true PvP.
  • Furthermore, there’s really not much in the way of options for the dominating team either. Take the example from our last KW that I mentioned above… We ended up swarming over two teams and having some back and forth with the teams on the other side. When the smaller teams pushed out and took a hex, we could have, in theory, let them… But at risk of being cut off. Plus, as I said, one of those overrun teams gave max points every run. Our best strategy from both a team and a personal standpoint was to keep kicking the poor guys every time they stuck their heads up. Wasn’t particularly fun on our end, can’t imagine they enjoyed it. We aren’t quite mighty enough to make a poodle, I guess.
  • Thinking through it more, rounds is completely the wrong way to go. As others have said, that just turns this into Fight Pits with a map. We also have Fight Pits and Gauntlet that are highly timer based… It’s good for variety if nothing else to keep this more of a marathon than a series of sprints.
  • That being said, I still intensely dislike the idea of the CI being locked to three teams for a large chunk of the event. Thinking about being one of those teams and having at most three or four bases that I’d be hitting for two days on endless repeat convinced me further on this. The raid button would help, but I still don’t see it being anyone’s idea of enjoyable. I guess you get PvE too, but again… Yawn.

So that all leads me to think… What exactly is it that’s so awful about this event? IMO, it’s the lack of evenly matched competition combined with the repetition, plus that teams really have very little incentive to do anything but keep holding their beaten opponents to the ground.

What you’ve proposed is certainly way better than what’s in place now, and if that’s what PG decided to go with, I’m fine with that… I’d be interested in trying it. But I’m going to throw my twist out anyways, even though I’m 99% sure you’ll still like yours better. Suggestions that need further thought but give an idea of the general direction are in italics.

  • Similar to what DR proposed, the CI map has 5-ish starting spots, which I’ll call “Ports” for now. One Epic momument in the middle, maybe a few smaller monuments to give some other points. The rest of what you proposed for CI sounds good in terms of VP/points awarded.
  • Starting 24 hours after the battle phase begins, the top 5 teams in terms of current VP/hour can opt to open Portals to CI.
  • Portals serve as a connection from your capital to the Port, which means you can then attack through the Portals into CI land.
  • However, when your team has a Portal open, you cannot attack in the mainland. Can’t defend attacks on mainland? Have reduced points to conquer mainland land? Bases are enfeebled when attacked in mainland? General idea is that this is your risk/reward… You place your mainland holdings at risk to chase VP and better points in CI.
  • If a team falls out of the top 5 in VP/hour, their Portal closes and the team that moved into the top 5 can now open one. Should this only count mainland VP? Can a team voluntarily return to the mainland, possibly with a cooldown? Lands in CI aren’t lost and continue to grant VP, but you’re cut off so you can’t attack there.

Pros - Doesn’t favor a fast start so much. Can open up CI earlier since you aren’t effectively eliminating 22 of 25 teams from first place contention after a day or two. Doesn’t lock CI teams into having to face the same two teams for multiple days. Gives the top ten or so teams something to work towards rather than just repeatedly kicking the nearest small team. Gives the kicked teams a chance at sweet and immediate revenge by stealing their bullies land while they’re messing around in CI.

Cons - Possibly too confusing. Doesn’t have the “all-in” CI, which I admit is interesting. Probably more, but I was supposed to be asleep by now and I’m tired of coming up with why my idea sucks.


#48

Very interesting ideas! I’ll give them a look over again in the morning when it’s less 2am-like and I’m more coherent :slight_smile:


#49

I know I am missing on a thousand different points while thinking about this idea I have in mind, but guess it’s worth a shot.

How about instead of the teams for CL being chosen by highest points as suggested, making it something that will have to be worked for. My thinking was that, let’s say there are 3 portals in the main island that leads to CL (Neutral location away from all starting location should be decided to balance this). A team can activate this portal by conquering all the hexes around this portal and gain access to one of the 3 starting locations in CL. Once a team gains CL access all their owned hexes will be taken by back blood and they will now be playing at the CL island. Once this happens, the Portal will close down for 12 hours or (24 hours?) and now the remaining 22 teams can fight to gain access to these portals, when the portals Re-open (Each at their own time from when they were accessed previously) the team that controls all surrounding hexes (Or the first team to control all hexes) will gain access to CL while kicking the team that previously gained access through that particular portal back to the main island (Guess this balances things a little, giving equal chance for all teams to ear points and not just the top 3). And this repeats for all 3 portals individually. Well something like this anyways is what I had in mind. :man_shrugging:

Other than this, love the proposal Red. This might actually make KW a fun event (If PG ever cared to make things fun again :roll_eyes:) .


#50

First off thank you for the work put in, yes location matters a lot in this event, removing mega and bringing back time bonus will tend to solve a lot of the issues you have pointed out. Unfortunately the money is less in doing so, ergo I wouldn’t hope for changes soon.


#51

Good idea Red

Question for you though.

It seems that many ideas get kicked around about improving many events (mostly pvp/feed)
The common theme that I see with PvP event complaints/improvement ideas is the heavy spenders dominating the moderate to low spending teams. Agree? Disagree?

Following that line of thinking I feel that the individual event outcomes themselves are not necessarily the problem but a byproduct of the league ranking system in general.

Not sure of any specifics just brain storming here…but…
Some sort of pvp spending tracker (last event pvp spending? avg of last 3 spending? avg of last season?)
Break the map/event into multiple “brackets” if you will
(Different brackets don’t even face each other in the event)
Populate the brackets based upon team pvp spending trends.
Heavy spenders vs Heavy spenders
Moderate vs Moderate
Low vs Low

  1. heavy spending teams spend more fighting like teams
  2. teams that spend less will possibly be encouraged to spend more up to a point (at least short term or risk being put into a higher spending bracket) as their money will go further in gaining team points
  3. teams should be less likely to be closed out of the event as they will be facing more evenly matched teams in terms of pvp resources expended.
  4. it has the potential to blanket improve every pvp event

points 1&2: PG potentially makes more $


#52

I am very against having more than 3 spots on the CI, as I mentioned above a few times. Rank 4-5 share team prizes with rank 3 and I think it should be possible for teams to be in that bracket. I do like the idea of a single Insane monument with a few better-than-major monuments, though. I will draw something up.

Interesting, for sure, but I was really looking for a massive risk for the massive reward.

There was a suggestion above to have the CI open on Day 2. I think that is more than enough time.

High risk for a juicy prize.

I think this would favor starting position heavily, as some teams would be at a natural advantage bases on their chosen location. Interesting idea though.

Mmm. I forgot to speak to that point didn’t I? If Mega Coins were to follow my ideal depreciating value system, I feel things would actually improve. People would have to do MORE megas to get to the same point. Additionally, with the top teams fighting one another, they will have to spend more to keep up, no?

Ish. I would say that Money overcomes strategy. If someone is spending 5k on an event, they deserve to kick my ass, but it shouldn’t ruin my entire event.

So making the leagues more divided, is that what you’re suggesting? That what I tried to do with the islands here, but by team choice.


#53

I for one fully support any changes to this broken PVP. Thank you Red for putting all your time into this, hopefully PG realizes just how much they need to change this PVP.


#54

Red I admire your dedication. I’m amazed that after all these years of well thought out then ultimately ignored proposals you still put in the effort.


#55

I am a glutton for punishment.


#56

So what do you think about this:

Could either do a player needs to control that one hex to use the dock or three hexes. Once controlled, the player would be able to attack the 3 hex area around any other dock. >_>


#57

Thoughts on this?


#58

Well thought out and very interesting Red. I like where this is going. Will brainstorm and read through all the responses to see if my questions were already addressed.

One question… Do we get boats back now?

((kidding)) :wink:


#59

I absolutely love this idea and appreciate the time you took developing it. I don’t know a single person who enjoys Kingdom Wars because it isn’t well balanced. The focus on pay to play is frustrating for so many reasons. I hope PG implements this, or a similar system, because it will help bring back some of the fun to the event. Players can be competitive without getting discouraged.

PG—I hope you’re actually taking note on all the positive comments toward this idea.


#60

I enjoy Kingdom Wars. But it needs improvement. The most basic, and fundamental to implement is the ability to move the capital. Just make this change, alone - and see where we need to go from there.