Gavien Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 Adding to the already large number of Ilum topics, I'd like to throw out an idea. For anyone that played WoW during Wrath, they know about Wintergrasp. This was a PvP zone where a huge battle took place every 2.5 hours for control of the zone. Faction imbalances obviously made this problematic, but one of Blizzard's earlier ideas was to try something called Tenactiy. Tenacity worked like the buff lowbies get in warzones to buff their stats. This didn't work out in the end because despite being able to 1-2 shot enemies and have massive amounts of HP, you could simply be stunlocked and burned down with ease due to the fact that since the battle took place every 2.5 hours, that's when everyone would show up in the zone. With Ilum, it's different. The battle goes all day and the zone isn't loaded up with massive amounts of people at one specific time every 2.5 hours. 2-3 Republic players could show up on Ilum which has 50 Imperials, sneak in, pick a group of them off, and get out before the Imperials could group up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strenif Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 I don't dislike the idea but I'd rather something else be done. Seems like a bandaid more then anything. How about putting in perma death for the overpopulated side to thin the numbers? =D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptwonline Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 It's the lazy developer solution to an imbalance problem. A properly designed warzone wouldn't have that issue. However, it's definitely better than having a handful of people fighting a hopeless battle against ridiculously stacked odds. That may work in the movies, but it doesn't work here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UjellyTrollicus Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 It's the lazy developer solution to an imbalance problem. A properly designed warzone wouldn't have that issue. However, it's definitely better than having a handful of people fighting a hopeless battle against ridiculously stacked odds. That may work in the movies, but it doesn't work here it isnt a warzone, and that is why you can't just "fix" population imbalance. tenacity isn't really the best solution because of how hard it is to balance something like that. tenacity will either be too weak, and you will still loose, or too strong, and the underdogs will wreck. imagine if tenacity simply multiplied your stats by however much the imbalance is (1:2 gives 2x stats. etc) eventually it could get to a point, even at something like 1:4, where the lower pop will just start wrecking everything in sight (imagine a jedi knight with ~60,000 hp hitting people for 1k on just the ticks of his basic strike) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ptwonline Posted January 18, 2012 Share Posted January 18, 2012 it isnt a warzone, and that is why you can't just "fix" population imbalance. Perhaps I used the wrong term and it caused confusion. I didn't mean "Warzone" like the capped PvP battlegrounds, I meant zones that are in dispute. This is an open world PvP area and so it's really almost impossible to guarantee anything close to balanced factions there at any time. That's why I suggested objectives that are more spread out--it helps blunt the numbers differences. And of course you need the standard PvP things that help prevent griefing like protected graveyards and reasonable respawn immunity time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts