"cRPG Kingdoms"

[Elindor]

Yeah, that could work PTX....

or it maybe COULD balance by Kingdom, but I dont know if that is possible.   Could come up with some issues there.

[Spa_geh_tea]

How about a once a month kingdom battle. One of eu and one for na. All the servers shutdown and everyone in crpg can participate. The exp rewards like strategist plus gold. All the points collected prior too effect the quality of equipment and such. It's a 24hr battle with unlimited spawnes, if spawned flags are all capped then match restarts and a point is awarded to the winner. At the end of 24hrs whoever has most points is awarded some percentage(based on time played) of the spoils of the kingdom (gold and exp).

Is it possible to have 250-300 person server if all the others aren't running?

[Auphilia]

I like the idea but I can see a bunch of clans picking the same Kingdom and the majority of the impatient solo players simply picking the less advantaged kingdom just so they can actually play the game.

Rewarding people for winning is one thing, rewarding people for stacking and always winning is another. They already get to farm x5 all the time, so why would they need further rewards for making the rest of the server enjoy the game less?

You will have all the best clans in one kingdom. Guaranteed for NA Kingdoms. 

[Spanish]

Maybe it should be done differently and instead of rounds won/lossed it should be done purely by avg score not K:D ratio but the avg score you get in battle and siege or maybe this is just the same as "performance". And clans should be balanced by the avg score of the entire clan collectively so that way the system would treat them like a singular player and still be able to balance them among the three kingdoms and use the player base as padding to even out the differences between the clans.

[JennaHaze]

TEXTWALL!

[Tristan_of_Erzoth]

I'd like to see this idea work, and it would be cool if implemented. As someone else said, I think the top 3 players of the winning kingdom should get some sort of bonus(like 10,000 gold for number 3, 20,000 for number 2, and the best player in the kingdom gets 30,000 gold and a title like "Hero of <insert faction here> for the next campaign.) to give people the incentive of WANTING to be the best. Also, I think there should be some sort of bonus for clans, so that way clans get some sort of bonus for teaming up, but not a huge one(like maybe a bonus to experience to members of the clan who does good or something), because this would make people want to join clans and have people team up more.

[Elindor]

bummmmmmmmmp

[Joker86]

Idea: valour grants kingdom points.

Downside: current valour calculation is screwed.

[Aleta]

this idea is great A bit like pottermore, except you can play awesome cRPG instead of brewing potions and have wizard duels.

[Byrdi]

But, players would not be balanced in teams by kingdoms, would they? So, how could anyone (but huge clans that bannerstack an entire team) actually have any influence over their kingdom gaining the most points?
For example, you get 10 players from kingdom A, 6 from kingdom B and 20 from kingdom C in one team. Kingdom A and kingdom B players are good and work hard to win the round, whilst kingdom C is mostly newbies. Kingdom C gets the most points for the win.

I just don't see how rewarding for wins could work... Perhaps giving kingdom points for personal score? Winning kingdom gets some sort of reward for all of it's players, but also top contributors of each kingdom get some sort of special reward?

My point as well. If these kingdoms were to mean anything, we would have to balance by kingdoms.

And if we balance by kingdoms, then all the good players/clans (if there are any entirely good clans anymore) would choose the same kingdoms. (Which would mean that the clan less people have even less to say.)

The only way I could see this work is if each clanless player and each clan are randomly assigned to a kingdom, and then balance would be done by banner, then kingdom.
The assignment should of course be redone every "campaign".

Also kingdom points should be based on relative performance instead of an absolute number of points awarded whenever you are playing well. Otherwise the kingdom that has the most active players would have a huge advantage.

PS: What I really like about this suggestion is that people in the same kingdoms would be used to playing with each other instead of random balance every time.
PPS: There should be more than just 3 kingdoms. More like 6 or 10. (Or just 2, but then people might rage quit cRPG for an entire campaign if they think their kingdom is too weak).

[Elindor]

Byrdi, good ideas all around!

You are right, balance by kingdom would make more sense ultimately possibly, and random assignment by clan then individual might be a way to do that (reassigned every campaign)

[Elindor]

bump

[Elindor]

bump