|
Post Reply 
|
Page <1 34567 8> |
| Author | |
Ander 
Postmaster General 
Joined: 24 Apr 2011 Status: Offline Points: 1269 |
 Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 14:24 |
|
I am in favour of splitting the map into regions rather than grouping alliances into leagues. Most of the alliances could participate with a fair chance if there were a flag for each region instead of one in each quadrant. Big alliances will try to gain as much regions as possible while the smaller alliances will mostly concentrate on one region where they are strongest. As all NAP/confeds are suspended, friendly alliances could discuss regional strategies and help each other to claim more regions. Territorial alliances will have a huge advantage in their home region while the spread out alliances will have more options for diplomacy and strategy. Good inter-alliance strategies are possible only when the flags are within a few hours' reach of the players. Otherwise the same army you sent to kill an opponent could end up killing your own confederate's army. Many players would prefer not to participate when there is a chance of friendly fire. Some people would want to move alliances specifically for the tournament - mostly players returning to their parent alliances to help out - why not let them do that? |
|
 |
|
|
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011 Status: Offline Points: 1005 |
Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 14:11 |
|
I would expect that NAPS and Confeds, will not take effect on the tourney squares themselves.
Therefore if a confed player sent troops to a square held by your alliance his troops would attack rather than rienforce. However, it could be interesting to see what would happen in such a tourney where confed rules do work.... As for splitting the alliances, I imagine they will be split into leagues based on alliance population. This will mean that alliances that hold onto innactive large accounts (simply for the added ranking on the alliance table) will be placed at a disadvantage. If this is the case, there may well be alot of innactive players kicked from such alliances in early feb. Therefore it may be worth investing in theives for when that happens ;) |
|
|
|
|
jordigui
Wordsmith 
Joined: 20 Jun 2010 Status: Offline Points: 157 |
Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 14:01 |
|
Hi, my main concern so far is how alliances can be considered and splitted? Considering the existence of many NAPs, confederations, etc. whixh implies that some alliances do not act independently. Thanks, TH
|
|
|
|
|
Prometheuz
Forum Warrior
Joined: 23 Nov 2011 Status: Offline Points: 230 |
Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 13:45 |
|
hmmm...judgement is reserved
|
|
|
|
|
Albatross
Postmaster General
Joined: 11 May 2011 Status: Offline Points: 1118 |
Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 13:20 |
|
Heh... like Tic-Tac-Toe on a chalkboard? :o) Three in a line starts accumulating points.
|
|
|
|
|
Darkwords
Postmaster General
Joined: 23 May 2011 Status: Offline Points: 1005 |
Posted: 23 Jan 2012 at 13:17 |
|
This sounds like a good idea, however I hope it is not a copy of the first tourney with a couple of 'update tests' thrown in...
It would be nice if there was a greater scattering of flags/squares to defend, therefore competing alliances would need to use more tactics; rather than just throwing everything into defence of one flag, you would also need to make attacks against other flags held by your closest competitors. It would also be interesting to have those squares on varying terrain types and also biome types, so that people can specialise their forces for the squares they wish to fight over. In relation to people emmigrating to different alliances, I beleive this is fair enough if the system from the 2nd tourney is used, ie they can move but the score that they have amassed so far does not go to that alliance. After all, is it not natural that when empires compete, less loyal lords will change their loyalties to stronger empires. What interests me is what the rewards would be for such a tourney, perhaps it will simply be an ammount of prestige for each member of the winning alliances, however if factions are to be released soon, allainces could be rewarded with increased relations to the fractions, whose ground the tourney was fought on. |
|
|
|
|
G0DsDestroyer
Postmaster 
Joined: 16 Sep 2010 Location: Ásgarð/Vanaheim Status: Offline Points: 975 |
Posted: 22 Jan 2012 at 00:12 |
|
Tournament #1 was actually player run!
 The Dev made tournment was better though I suppose, although I did better in the original player run tournament! |
|
|
|
|
invictusa
Forum Warrior
Joined: 16 Dec 2011 Status: Offline Points: 488 |
Posted: 21 Jan 2012 at 21:48 |
I can see it now: Illyriad Herald: Tournament VI announced: Transcontinental roadway! King Sigurd issues decree to the realm for immediate construction of transit system. Faction Hubs have been ordered to supply stone at discounted prices for those wishing to participate. |
|
|
|
|
Angrim
Postmaster General
Joined: 02 Nov 2011 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 1173 |
Posted: 21 Jan 2012 at 20:42 |
|
Obliged, Quackers and The_Dude. In the interest of not having leagues but encouraging maximum participation (and, you know, because sometimes it's fun to overthink these things), I'll post these potential modifications of the first tournament for discussion: 1. The eight forts are placed randomly Sat/Sun at 00:00 each of four weeks. All special, passable squares are eligible. The locations are not announced; alliances must find them on the map. 2. Points are awarded for each second an alliance occupies a fort. Alliances are handicapped by dividing the raw points (based on accumulated seconds forts were occupied) by the total population of the alliance (or some other agreeable measure of "strength"). 3. Unaffiliated players are considered "alliances of one" for scoring purposes, but joining an alliance during the tournament leaves any points score behind in their "old alliance". 4. At the end of the week, existing forts are removed/replaced. Occupying forces at the eight forts removed are returned to their home settlements. The goal would be to allow nimble, smaller alliances to compete by quickly identifying and occupying forts as they appear, generating score on a per-second basis more quickly than large alliances, and then withdrawing to shepherd their strength once the larger alliances arrive in force for the following week's contest. Players can drop out of an alliance at any time; if desirable, players joining an alliance could be queued until the start of the following week. Rewards accrue only to those players in the alliance at the end of the tourney. Edited by Angrim - 21 Jan 2012 at 20:42 |
|
|
|
|
The_Dude
Postmaster General
Joined: 06 Apr 2010 Location: Texas Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Posted: 21 Jan 2012 at 20:34 |
8 squares were designated as Flags. 0|500, 500|500, 500|0, etc around the compass points. These squares are now labeled Epic Battle Sites on the map and still have all Friend of Camp features deactivated on them. Each flag had a winner. Winner was the alliance that occupied the flag for the most accumulated time during the tournament which lasted 31 days. Results: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/kings-first-tournament-the-results_topic1509.html
Edited by The_Dude - 21 Jan 2012 at 20:36 |
|
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
Page <1 34567 8> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Alliance Tournament League-Based Modifications
Topic Options
Qaal wrote: