You are not logged in.

  • "falcotron" started this thread

Posts: 3,022

Location: San Francisco, CA, US

Occupation: Software Developer/Musician

  • Send private message

1

Monday, October 5th 2009, 10:15am

Who's left to fight?

It looks like DIE just shrank massively, and mostly at the top. Meanwhile, Ronin merged into TTW, INQ have taken themselves out of the game, and most of the REAPR offshoots have been absorbed back into REAPR. I have no idea what Lily and friends are planning next, or the INQ guys, but at the moment, it looks like there are 5 serious orders in W4: REAPR, BoW, DWL, TTW, and KT.*

The good news is, we almost have a perfect ring of alliances; all it would take would be KT-REAPR to complete the circle.

The bad news is that, even if the 5 orders were perfectly matched (which we obviously aren't), a 5-way ring is too small for interesting battles. With the 6-way ring, everyone had 3 targets, and could choose between a 3-on-3 battle or a 2-on-2 battle with 1 order sitting out and 1 completely neutral (and available to merc and/or make deals). But with a 5-way ring, there are only 2 targets, and either way it's a 2-on-2 battle with 1 order sitting out. Yawn.

Since KT are the ones most weakened by all of the recent changes, they obviously need to add new allies. But what choices do they have?
  • Ally with REAPR. That's exactly the ring I just described. REAPR-DWL battles might work well with KT on one side and TTW on the other, and KT-DWL might become interesting again with REAPR on one side and BoW on the other. But taking KT out of TTW's corner would probably ruin the REAPR-TTW battles, and BoW could easily slaughter either KT or TTW at a whim.
  • Ally with DWL. KT-REAPR could be great battles, and TTW-REAPR might work better as well, but that could mean DWL-REAPR becomes too easy for DWL, and any BoW battles would still be walkovers.
  • Ally with both. Then KT-BoW could be interesting battles, with DWL and REAPR on the sidelines. And REAPR-DWL would probably still work. But there'd be nobody else who could reasonably fight, and TTW would be particularly screwed.
  • Ally with both, and get TTW to also ally with REAPR. Now they're effectively two halves of the same order; they can fight BoW, while REAPR can fight DWL.
However you slice it, we're pretty much reduced to the same 2 battles over and over until something changes.

KT could also stick with just TTW and drop out of world politics. That leaves TTW-REAPR and maybe DWL-REAPR as the only plausible battles, but maybe KT could have fun beating up merc orders and other top-heavy small orders, and who cares about everyone else, right? If I were them, I'd be thinking about that idea right now. (Of course BoW will still come down on them sometimes, because they have nobody else to fight, and DWL and REAPR might also just because they'll get sick of fighting each other....)

Maybe it's time for the "Holy Risk" idea to be brought up again?

* What about VV? Well, you can count them if you want, but they have exactly the same allies as TTW, so you might as well treat them as one order for purposes of this discussion.

2

Monday, October 5th 2009, 10:45am

I think we're pretty much in agreement, falcotron, that there is no ideal configuration right now.

My thought is that too much power is consolidated into a few orders, and DWL, REAPR, and TTW are the worst offenders right now. TTW, for crying out loud, now has 58 members after absorbing Ronin. This is almost as big as the biggest orders in W4 ever were. I mean, why not just aim for a record--gut KT and VV and a couple others, and try to get an order up to 100!!! Never mind that it means nobody will have anybody to fight.

And that's pretty much the way things are now. As long as these three orders insist on holding onto their numbers, especially at the top levels, W4 can't do much. A lot of smaller orders don't want to play as proxies for the big orders to have their battles (that's where INQ is, and Bruce and a few others maybe fit into this category, too). With the current configuration, there are really only 4 fighting orders left...and unlike you, I'm not counting KT in this because, well, we saw what happened to KT in battle yesterday. That doesn't really fit the description of "fighting." :rolleyes:

Well, if you want my solution, here it is: DWL, REAPR, and TTW all split into two orders each. Those two new DWLs ally with each other, but then keep no other allies the same--DWL1 might have TTW and BoW, while DWL2 might have VV and REAPR2. The two TTWs, or TTW and Ronin if they just undo the merger, similarly ally with each other, but then keep different sets of other allies, and REAPR1 and REAPR2 do the same. Nobody under any circumstance would have more than two allies, and we'd end up with about 8-10 orders of 15-25 people each who have reasonable chances in battles against each other.

DWL1: 15-20 people
DWL2: 15-20 people
TTW: 25 people
Ronin: 25 people
KT: 20 people
REAPR1: 15 people
REAPR2: 15 people
VV: 15 people
INQ: 15-20 people

And then maybe Bruce could fight on this level, too, and perhaps also DIE if someone can resurrect the order (or maybe REAPR2 would be DIE since so many from DIE ended up in REAPR). But this would at least create a little parity and balance, and it would allow people to fight a variety of targets, and not the same one or two battles every time.

Of course, the downside of this is that there are not enough willing and capable OMs and ACs in W4 to make it happen. A big part of why Ronin folded is because they simply didn't have strong leadership who spent enough time on the game to run an order ever since Ria left, and OMs and ACs burn out after a time. Also, some people are probably simply unwilling to give up their order and alliance identities that have been forged over a year and a half. I can respect this, and I don't actually expect people to buy into this solution and try it out. But if I were a god in HW and could rearrange peons as I saw fit, I'd endow a few more people with leadership skills and this is what I'd do with W4 orders.

  • "falcotron" started this thread

Posts: 3,022

Location: San Francisco, CA, US

Occupation: Software Developer/Musician

  • Send private message

3

Monday, October 5th 2009, 10:58am

Well, what you're suggesting is essentially a ring of 6 or more orders, which is what I was hoping for in the first place, which I'm obviously not against. But as far as the details...

Is TTW really as strong as DWL or REAPR? Sure, they're as _big_ as us, even bigger in fact, but that's not the same thing.

Also, how many of the Christians would really be interested in Christian-on-Christian battles? That's been a huge stumbling block in the past, and I suspect it would be in the future.

Finally, while BoW and KT are probably as strong as half of DWL or REAPR or TTW, this still leaves VV, INQ, GHL, Bruce, Aloha, etc. out in the cold. I think a shakeup this drastic really should benefit more than just BoW and KT (especially since BoW seems pretty happy where they are right now).

Also, the leadership vacuum you bring up is a serious problem, and I don't see any way to solve it.

But, getting back to the Holy Risk idea--judging by my experience in HW2 and TG1, the real deterrent to running orders is the responsibility to 50 people and 4 allies and 18 months of history and hopefully an even longer future. Getting people to run an xp-battle order where nobody really cares what your record is, that's easy. Would it likewise be easy to get people to share in running a 5-man Risk team for 45 days? Probably easier than finding leaders for DWL2, REAP2, and TTW2, at least.

4

Monday, October 5th 2009, 11:22am

Perhaps so. HW Risk would erase some of the old identities and alliances that are the stumbling blocks. The risk, though, is that we lose more people who were invested in those identities.

And I don't think that Aloha, VV, Bruce, etc., would be left out in the cold with what I was proposing. They are choosing to be outside of the fighting circle for the most part right now because a) they don't have leadership who wants to fight battles (in which case, why have an order?), or b) they don't see the point in fighting proxy battles for DWL and REAPR. If all orders were smaller, and if the latter is the reason that these orders are playing on the sidelines right now, then they would have opportunities to ally and fight, too, which would leave us with 8-12 orders with varying allies, which would not be all that bad.

On the other hand, I don't think that all of these orders really want to fight regular battles...or else they would be.


And, no, even TTW with 58 people could not beat REAPR or DWL...not even close. Many of those TTW people are lvl 60 and under, and many play non-premium. Most don't spend hours a day on this game, and some don't even log in every day, I'm betting. But if these people donate, they can still raise a hell of a bank account quickly. I mean, TTW ought to be able to raise 30-40k gold each day with max donations (sorry, I'm too lazy to count up levels and pull out a calculator). Give half of TTW a couple of allies who are smaller, but have more power in them, and that baby TTW order could declare reasonably often and win just as well as a baby DWL could.

And if you want a Christian-on-Christian battle, heck, I'll go declare on Buba right now. :P

Dradaki

Unregistered

5

Monday, October 5th 2009, 4:10pm

Have everyone disband, andz try to have everyone have small 5-10 man orders so there will be more battle options.

Not gonna happen though as most people want to still have that 70 man order where 3/4 are inactive so they can be the "Biggest" order is said world, instead of having fun. Should there be that 1 player that is like that, mail his members to leave.

  • "falcotron" started this thread

Posts: 3,022

Location: San Francisco, CA, US

Occupation: Software Developer/Musician

  • Send private message

6

Monday, October 5th 2009, 4:32pm

Have everyone disband, andz try to have everyone have small 5-10 man orders so there will be more battle options.

Not gonna happen though as most people want to still have that 70 man order where 3/4 are inactive so they can be the "Biggest" order is said world, instead of having fun. Should there be that 1 player that is like that, mail his members to leave.
I doubt there's a single person in either DWL or REAPR who cares that TTW is much bigger than either of us.

People don't want the biggest order; they want the strongest order.

I really don't understand this obsession with inactives as the root of all evil. Inactives are completely irrelevant, except as a means of annoying Vedauwoo, you, and a couple other people (who are mostly gone from W4 anyway). If someone wants to be even bigger than TTW by taking over the biggest dead order as a base to start from, let them; it won't make any difference in the battles.

Dradaki

Unregistered

7

Monday, October 5th 2009, 5:24pm

Well at this point, if there is only like 1 battle that will really mean anything, is having that 50 man order really worth it, or would you rather have fun and split into several orders that will bring several battles & more XP (possibly)?

Personally I support the idea of orders no larger then 10 members. You will create more orders, more "evenly" matched orders, more battles, more XP opportunities, etc.

The Black Knight

Unregistered

8

Monday, October 5th 2009, 5:43pm

I'm going to comment over here, because I figure there's a better chance of getting Jozza to participate.

Honestly, this is the same problem that has been around ever since we originally put the orders together. We've also seen this coming for quite a while, with more than a few people proclaiming that we were headed towards a bland and boring w4 with no new challenges. Back when I was in DWL, it was always the same old thing; "Who are we going to attack tomorrow night Brain? The same orders we attack every night, Pinky, DIE, KT, TTW, or INQ!" I imagine the same story was playing out in every other major order as well.

Freddy was the one who came up with Holy Risk, and I think that's probably the best of all possible options now for bringing some measure of fun back to the game, but I don't know that the biggest problem is just a lack of leadership but a lack of participation all the way around. Nobody wants to leave the comfort of a DWL, Reaper, BoW, TTW, etc., aside from a very few of us, and honestly; how many truly active players do we have in w4 altogether anyway? Maybe 150-200? And if you want to look at how many people are playing on a daily basis, I'd bet it's less than that. Out of that number, how many are going to take the leap of faith and leave their orders to jump into a totally new project like Holy Risk? Even among the few of us who come onto the forum, there is a lot of disagreement with regards to whether we do the Holy Risk thing, something like blert's idea of splitting up the larger orders, or just continuing the way we have been.

I know DWL has traditionally gotten a lot of flack (usually good-natured, of course) for being abysmally slow in making decision. Well, what are running into here, if not the same thing? We've seen the issue, we've talked about it, we've ignored it, we've talked about it again, ad nauseum. Personally, I think it's time to do something. Either we split up the orders, do the Holy Risk thing, or continue doing what we've been doing, but I think we need to decide.

Also, insofar as the Holy Risk idea goes, I think a more realistic goal might be 10 active orders of 5 players each, culling from all of the big orders, and even that might be a stretch. Will erialc be willing to leave Reaper? Will f35soldier or wurzel be willing to leave DWL? Will BoW be willing to essentially disband? Right now, a lot of top players already have their minds made up as to who they are going to ally with and what orders they're going to continuing being a part of, even if (like me) they aren't actually in the membership roles. Will we all be willing to throw that to the wind and try something new?

jozza279

Trainee

Posts: 114

Occupation: IT tech

  • Send private message

9

Monday, October 5th 2009, 11:32pm

I'm going to comment over here, because I figure there's a better chance of getting Jozza to participate.


No all those words scare me.

*runs out of the forum crying like a girl *
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you have got it made.
- Groucho Marx


\m/ ASCII METAL! \m/

jozza279

Trainee

Posts: 114

Occupation: IT tech

  • Send private message

10

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 12:01am

I am intrigued by holy risk I must admit but I am also one of those waverers who you would need to win over. W4 is the only one where I have stayed in the same order the entire time. I moved in W5 and have regretted it ever since, now I am in an impossible situation there. Okay I know that situation won't happen here but it still makes me uneasy.

As far as HW Risk is concerned have you thought about how to handle rogue volunteers. W5's xp battles used to have a real problem with this, people would go to great lengths to organize invite only battles only to find gate crashers popping up. If it was to happen all orders would have to be carefully balanced because you have to face the fact that you can't substitute 1 level 90 for 2 level 60's for example both TBK and Falco will admit that despite their best attempts at a formula they haven't come up with a working one yet.

As for blerts initial figures of 15-20 people in each DWL order, I just don't think we have enough actives to achieve that.

As for DWL's slowness to make decisions I hope you've noticed a marked improvement generally since I became OM if I've managed to achieve nothing else I try to keep the pace of that fairly quick.

And this discussion will go nowhere again unless it is brought to the attention of the key people TBK mentioned and those he didn't.
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you have got it made.
- Groucho Marx


\m/ ASCII METAL! \m/

The Black Knight

Unregistered

11

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 12:22am

Yeah, I hate to say it, but I think this is going to be one of those PMs that goes out to God and everybody, and then we wait for everyone to respond, people get nervous and change their minds while we're waiting, and so on.

This is honestly going to be a lot like herding cats.

  • "falcotron" started this thread

Posts: 3,022

Location: San Francisco, CA, US

Occupation: Software Developer/Musician

  • Send private message

12

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 12:23am

I think there are three major advantages of Holy Risk or some other tournament idea over splitting up the orders:

First, a tournament has a fixed end, after which we all return to our orders and decide what to do next.

Second, because the tournament doesn't "mean anything," it's easier to get people to take leadership roles.

Third, because there's a little bit of novelty besides just "same game, different alliances," it might attract more people.

Of course there's a risk that a month later we'll go back to the exact same situation. There's even a risk that, say, DWL and REAPR survive the reconstruction better than anyone else and the power ends up even more concentrated. I wish I had an answer to that beyond this, but... at least we'll have a month to think about it and come up with the answer, while we're having fun and doing something different that might make us more creative.

jozza279

Trainee

Posts: 114

Occupation: IT tech

  • Send private message

13

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 12:33am

I think there are three major advantages of Holy Risk or some other tournament idea over splitting up the orders:

First, a tournament has a fixed end, after which we all return to our orders and decide what to do next.
Requires trusted people to stay in orders but I don't think that would be a problem



Third, because there's a little bit of novelty besides just "same game, different alliances," it might attract more people.
Definately novelty is always good.

Of course there's a risk that a month later we'll go back to the exact same situation. There's even a risk that, say, DWL and REAPR survive the reconstruction better than anyone else and the power ends up even more concentrated.
But who knows those that take part will have been part of something no-one else in HW has and may form closer ties and who knows maybe even another order.
The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you have got it made.
- Groucho Marx


\m/ ASCII METAL! \m/

  • "falcotron" started this thread

Posts: 3,022

Location: San Francisco, CA, US

Occupation: Software Developer/Musician

  • Send private message

14

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 1:17am

Well at this point, if there is only like 1 battle that will really mean anything, is having that 50 man order really worth it, or would you rather have fun and split into several orders that will bring several battles & more XP (possibly)?

Personally I support the idea of orders no larger then 10 members. You will create more orders, more "evenly" matched orders, more battles, more XP opportunities, etc.
Numbers are almost completely meaningless. Who cares about 50 people? The top 10 members of DWL, REAPR, or TTW could probably take on the bottom 50 of TTW without breaking a sweat.

Meanwhile, nobody's going to try to build an average order; all of the new 10-man orders will try to be as strong as possible. Maybe a few people will be clever and try to deliberately look weaker than they are ("Maybe if I take 3 of the weakest people around I can get away with having 7 of the strongest" or "I won't take any of the 92s, and then maybe I can get away with having 10 90+s" or whatever). But everyone will be trying to build orders to win, and that will lead us to the same situation as today.

Well, it won't be quite the same situation as today. All those mid-level members who serve a lot of valuable purposes in a large order--helping to run things, keeping the cow list going, offering continuation back through over a year of history, maybe providing future strength in another year, and, most of all, just generally making the order feel fresh and alive and comfortable and friendly--won't be as useful in a brand-new 10-man order. If everyone has only 10 slots, nobody will have room for, say, a level-69 gendell, which would be a big loss to W4.

A big part of the reason that people are still around is that they've been in the DWL or BoW or TTW or KT or whoever for a year; it feels like a family, and that's what keeps them in the game. If we neglect them, the people who are here mostly for the competition will be the only ones left.

15

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 2:11am

Second, because the tournament doesn't "mean anything," it's easier to get people to take leadership roles.


Risk...not mean anything? Sacrilege!

Or else, for a game that isn't supposed to mean anything, my brother sure flipped over a lot of Risk boards in anger in our youths. :P

  • "falcotron" started this thread

Posts: 3,022

Location: San Francisco, CA, US

Occupation: Software Developer/Musician

  • Send private message

16

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 2:16am

Second, because the tournament doesn't "mean anything," it's easier to get people to take leadership roles.


Risk...not mean anything? Sacrilege!

Or else, for a game that isn't supposed to mean anything, my brother sure flipped over a lot of Risk boards in anger in our youths. :P
You must not have moved on to Diplomacy and Axis&Allies; after that, Risk is always a mindless game you play to forget how you want to kill your best friends over that betrayal in that last Diplomacy game.:)

Posts: 58

Location: West Midlands, UK

Occupation: Mech Engineer

  • Send private message

17

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 3:01pm

I have skim read the post as I just can't read masses of text on a pc screen.

I would like to put my idea forward for a tournament based system. Basically orders of no more than 10 players with a draft system so no one order can have all the best players. Then battles are played out at reset every 3-4 days with every battle happening at the same time so no one team can influence any outcome by gate crashing another battle. There would be no mercs in the world as all would participate in the FUN lol. You could get 10-20 teams and could do a league based tounrament having 10 battles every 3-4 days like i said. Maybe even have League battles on Wed and some xp battles on Sat or Sun so we all level together then play the tournament in the week giving everyone 5 days a week to work on their players.

All battles could be non volunteer and non merc but pre strikes are allowed to weaken rival orders who are close to you in the league.

It is a massive long shot to get everyone on board but you could set up a small website to post battle matches and declaration times and also current standings.

Seems like everyone is looking for an idea so may as well all throw something on the table and see if something good comes up.

erialc

Intermediate

Posts: 256

Location: London

Occupation: Social Worker

  • Send private message

18

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 8:01pm

You could get 10-20 teams and could do a league based tounrament having 10 battles every 3-4 days
what are you nut's!!! my character is weak enough :( let alone being in that many battles in such a short period of time :(
W2 contrarian (non-premium) ~ W3 contra (non-premium)~ W4 contra aka erialc (non-premium) ~ W5 Yasmine - Sold ~ W6 contrarian (OM) Dragon Warriors ~ W8 Holy PIA (non-premium) (OM) Because We Can

The Black Knight

Unregistered

19

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 8:35pm

You could get 10-20 teams and could do a league based tounrament having 10 battles every 3-4 days
what are you nut's!!! my character is weak enough :( let alone being in that many battles in such a short period of time :(

Ha ha ha... you know, the last time I checked (which was last night at around 0600 server time, you were the 11th strongest player in w4 (for total stats), or 12th strongest on personal stats alone.

If you're not strong enough, that doesn't leave an awful lot of us left to fight.

Posts: 58

Location: West Midlands, UK

Occupation: Mech Engineer

  • Send private message

20

Tuesday, October 6th 2009, 11:12pm

When i said 10 battles every 3-4 days i meant

Team 1 vs Team 2
Team 3 vs Team 4
Etc Etc
Team 19 vs Team 20

Not each order has 10 battles every 3-4 days lol

21

Wednesday, October 7th 2009, 10:59am

any new idea is working for me, blert is right and falco as well, whatever you guys come up with count me in because the way I see it W4 is dieing. More smaller orders or teams or HW Risk.

22

Wednesday, October 7th 2009, 3:10pm

how about a shake up of alliances and an end to the circular alliances?

BoW, REAPR and KT vs DWL & TTW

or BoW & REAPR vs DWL, KT, & TTW

DWL & BoW vs REAPR, KT, & TTW

I'm not sure how fair any of these are as I'm not as up-to-date with my W4 politics as I should be to comment, but as a member of KT I think this would help keep us from being left out in the cold lol and thats really all I'm worried about ;)