Shattered Kingdoms

I have read your post and reread your post. As I said at the conclusion of my own I disagree with some of your points but agree with others.
One point that I think most people agree on that cabal powers should fade not be like a switch, to give a cabal the ability to fight a war not get relic.
Some of your other ideas have merit some I dont agree with however I think we both agree their should likely be a third "challenge" between outer and inner guardian what it becomes is really up to D. You seem to want it mostly as a time sink to give PvP a chance to happen between guardians. Where I think that PvP will only ever happen around a PvE battle in CRS because simply put it is the best time to strike.
As far as your changes to the murder holes ... It does nothing. I would rather see siege craft fixed rather than removed. I can throw out half a dozen ideas to fix siege craft to make it more useable from little tweaks to making it completely different. However as far as ranged combat in CRS personally I think the skirmish skill should be limited to Scouts to return scouts to the top of the food chain when it comes to bow fights, but that is another thread in itself.
As I said on the room spells I was of two minds but it seems reasonable to limit their effectiveness in CRS.
As far as HQs not being safe zones ... you get warning if someone tries to kill you. They have to deal with a PvE encounter to get there. About as safe as it gets in SK.

As far as the nanny code we are talking about the code is trying to make it a choice rather than a given. Honestly I enjoy SK because I try my best to ignore anyone being a backside hat. However I also know that just about everyone involved in CRS captures either is or feels they are dealing with one so its OK to be one back. Anything to make them stop and think about it so they make the choice rather than just going with the flow is good in my mind. This is more a psychology thing someone has just been bullying you, lets face it having your relic stolen is like a bully making fun of you in SK. After a time you are able to turn the tables get your own back however you are also given the perfect chance to lay the boot in. It really does take restraint to not do it, however if you have to go out of your way to lay the boot in more people are going to stop and think about it before they do it. I am not saying it wont get done just their is more desire to do it rather than lets take the freebie well we have it. This is similar mentality that some old hands will leave equipment for dead people where someone who is getting their first PK win will often do a full loot.

I would also be interested in the idea of their being non cabal relics that could be recovered from PvE to buff guardians. But the 'Third challenge' idea really would need to be fully fleshed out to actually discuss them reasonably. If I find the time and desire I will throw out exactly what my extra guardian idea would include.
I do like the idea of a reward for participation in CRS scaling up the better you achieve. So long as it wasn't too large carrots are always better than sticks.

I'm trying really hard not to headdesk here. You just don't seem to be understanding the concepts I'm talking about and if you've read and re-read the post and are still at that point, I'm not sure I can fix that. I'm going to try one more time, though, because apparently I like to hit my head on walls. So, here goes.



No. Not a third challenge, an extension of the time necessary to effect a raid. There are PvE challenges in my new model to provide tactical considerations as to when to engage, and the new skill I've suggested works to that effect, but it's not about "a third challenge." It's about an extension of vulnerability to defensive attacks. Or, in the case of undefended runs, of balancing the challenge of the PvE raid with the PvP raid WITHOUT imbalancing the PvP raid. Your third guardian idea will imbalance the PvP raid.



Actually, changes to the murder holes does just about everything to make solo defenses that wipe 9 PC raid groups with ease impossible. It changes the entire dynamic of attack and defense in CRS to something more balanced than its current incarnation.

It will take just as much work from a code perspective to fix siegecraft, and more work from a build perspective to fix the weapons the skill uses as it would be to scrap the skill and start fresh.

Skirmish on mercs is not the problem. I've wiped raid groups as a solo defender with a range-spec'd merc and it had nothing to do with skirmish and everything to do with the fact that I could sit there, basically untouchable, and pick off half of a group of attackers before they could get through the outer guardian. I didn't even use skirmish, but instead just "shoot." Warlocks, sorx, prepped necros, bards, none of them even have the skirmish skill and all of them can wipe 9 PC raid groups solo because of the murder holes. That is imbalanced and needs to be fixed.



No, you get the same things if you're in a city inn. A safe zone is the inner guardian's room, where it would take a minimum of 4-5 PCs to get you, some of them have a large chance of dying, and you can logout/recall/quaff recall from that location as soon as you get warning that they're trying to. HQs themselves are not safe zones. Inner guardian rooms are.



I summed up your entire next paragraph with one line in it. My response to that is: So? There's entire classes in this game that are built to require restraint. There's multiple situations where you are not protected from or coddled for not having enough restraint, in PvP and PvE alike. This is no different. It's the responsibility of the raid leader to make informed, responsible decisions as regards extending CRS events into the future by forcing a counterstrike situation, or just finishing the raid. An "Are you sure?" screen is not appropriate.

The bottom line is, it's pretty clear not only from your implications but also your direct, open statements that you don't have enough first hand experience with the CRS system in all of its various incarnations to hold an informed opinion on how to fix it. That's fine, there's nothing wrong with that, but you do need to understand the limits of your grasp on how the system functions in real-time before you decide on how to fix it. There's not too many people playing the game right now that have had as much or more experience with the CRS systems as I have had in the last couple of years, and I think that puts me in a better position to understand the existing failings and successes of the system.

I can say with confidence that I have done more CRS, both defense and offense, than anyone on SK during the last few years and nothing I've seen so far in this thread will "fix" the system - especially Wily E Coyote mazes or removing murder holes.

I think two simple changes could get people interested in CRS:

1. Unlink cabal powers from the relic (this is the ultimate rich get richer and poor get poorer model that kills the desire for a lot of players to do CRS)

2. In addition to tokens for a great victory during the raid itself, give a (stacking) token bonus to all members of a cabal that capture and hold enemy relics. The more relics you capture, the more tokens you get - the numbers can be tweaked. The tokens could be awarded at the 72 hour reboot, weekly or monthly - whatever seems the most balanced.

You are much more likely to get players interested and involved in CRS by providing additional incentives (more opportunities to get tokens) than via punishment (losing all your cabal powers).

As for how to balance offense vs defense in CRS, I think the only flagrant offender is the warlock since fireball, cone of cold and chain lightning do obscene damage vs a group of defenders. Sadly, CRS is also the one niche where warlocks shine, with them being average at best in all other areas of the game.

The only suggestion that might be reasonable is to give the room with the outer guardian a magic dampening effect, which reduces all area of effect damage by 50% (or whatever number ends up being "balanced"). I just wonder if anyone would play a warlock, if that change was made.

Or perhaps there is a slight chance you are wrong with some of your thoughts as you have said I am ...

Siege craft could be fixed with not a lot of effort, Make it a spell not a skill. Make it require you to hold a bolt and be in the same room as a ballista to cast. Then make it a weak version of fireball. Fixed. It is now useful to anyone with out a range area spell effect. It isnt as good as anyone with a range area spell effect. Means every attacked needs to prep for a range spell effect. In fact that simple tweak could then be changed again to make the affect of ballista fire when there is no one to defend a HQ. To closer balance attacking with no defenders vs attacking with defenders and the guardian adjusted to suit.

Inn VS cabal HQ safety levels ... pass the pipe please because that is some good stuff.

I think on that note I am done in the threat unless I get the motivation to fully flesh out the three guardian idea.

I like the OP of this thread. I believe some of the ideas are actually possible.

I'm going to agree with Finney. The negative reinforcement of losing cabal powers only causes players to despair and lose hope, delete and roll for the winning side. That needs removed. Instead it should be more focused on incentives like loyalty tokens, coin, and other nice things for the victors. In the current system you will suffer two defeats if you lose at CRS. You lose your cabal powers, and you lose your loot.