1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
Wynncraft, the Minecraft MMORPG. Play it now on your Minecraft client at (IP): play.wynncraft.com. No mods required! Click here for more info...
Dismiss Notice
Have some great ideas for Wynncraft? Join the official CT (content team) and help us make quests, builds, cinematics and much more!

Multiple Wars At A Time

Discussion in 'General Suggestions' started by Theeef, Dec 3, 2019.

?

Should one guild be able to attack multiple territories at once?

  1. Yes

    28 vote(s)
    77.8%
  2. Yes but no flavored (no)

    8 vote(s)
    22.2%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    With the recent rule changes, sub guilds are now completely allowed, as seen in this clip:

    [​IMG]

    With this, you're now able to make multiple guilds and attack multiple territories at a time (and it's actually allowed now, even if it wasn't enforced before). Since it's officially allowed now, I feel like it'd make a lot more sense to just give guilds the ability to attack multiple territories at a time. This will prevent additionally useless guilds from being created, encourage people to keep recruiting to their main guild (since it will be a higher level majority of the time), and will help maintain the identity of existing guilds.

    That's it, vote in pool if you agree. Thanks.
     
  2. huge6446

    huge6446 Retired nether pvp guy HERO

    Messages:
    441
    Likes Received:
    1,332
    Trophy Points:
    91
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    Why the heck not. I can imagine war servers being overloaded though. Should be a cap at 2 or 3 wars per guild
     
  3. ImScarce

    ImScarce Well-Known Adventurer VIP

    Messages:
    15
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    46
    Minecraft:
    definitely yes
     
    Theeef likes this.
  4. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    I don't see why it's unreasonable to have multiple wars on one server. Maybe if you start a war and your guild is already in war, you just get teleported to the same world and the mobs go in a different place. This would obviously cause problems if the territories were directly adjacent to each other though.
     
  5. Melkor

    Melkor The dark enemy of the world HERO

    Messages:
    743
    Likes Received:
    1,048
    Trophy Points:
    117
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    I foresee amusingly laggy war servers.
     
    Coragon42 and Theeef like this.
  6. izzVersels

    izzVersels Travelled Adventurer

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    14
    Minecraft:
    This would require 2 different world border boxes.. I don't think thats possible
     
    StormKing3 likes this.
  7. Viaire

    Viaire Well-Known Adventurer HERO

    Messages:
    400
    Likes Received:
    121
    Trophy Points:
    64
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    Tbh I don't agree with sub guilds even tho I have used them in the past but I guess this at least makes it clearer who you are actually fighting against instead of trying to work out which sub guild belongs to which guild. Might as well remove the player cap on guilds as well while your there.
     
    Theeef and Bliss like this.
  8. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    That’s only if they choose to do multiple wars in one world. If they went with this route, there are many ways to keep a player inside the territory other then world borders.
     
  9. Sg_Voltage

    Sg_Voltage For Legal Reasons, My Last Custom Title Was a Joke HERO

    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Minecraft:
    I agree, but there needs to be some cost associated with attacking more than one territory at once. By only being able to attack one place at once, speed is the most important factor so having lots of players in one war is the best strategy. If guilds could start an essentially unlimited number of wars at once, every guild member who can solo a war would be a captain and wars would only be about having the most captains.

    To make your system work, there would need to be a cost to starting wars which increases based on the number of active wars. The first war could be free, but every subsequent war would need to cost progressively more, soft capping at something like three or four wars. Something like this would probably help small guilds keep a small amount of territory and allow large guilds to take over large amounts of territory.

    That doesn't really fix the one man war problem, but if the holders of the territory could enter the war and fight with the attacker(s) it would probably solve the issue while making warring more interesting so I could get behind a change like that.

    Look, I'm not against your suggestion (I supported it), but in its current form it's just not a well thought out (or not a well articulated) idea. Even setting aside the potential technical issues which I don't know enough about to comment on, to implement a system where you can have more than one war at once would require a complete overhaul of how warring works (something which I fully support).
     
  10. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    Why pay a cost to attack more when you could just make a subguild and do it for free?
     
  11. Sg_Voltage

    Sg_Voltage For Legal Reasons, My Last Custom Title Was a Joke HERO

    Messages:
    590
    Likes Received:
    492
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Minecraft:
    I could say the exact same thing about your entire suggestion though. Why change something when it makes no difference since you can just use subguilds?

    Also, even with your suggestion, subguilds will still exist to get around the cap on people who can declare wars in any one guild. If your problem is with subguilds existing your solution is a really bad one as it does the exact opposite by giving subguilds a major buff.

    In the current system, if you want to attack 100 territories at once you would need 100 guilds. People don't do that because it's really hard to grow and manage that many guilds. With what you're suggesting, decent guilds could use just one or two subguilds to take over entire areas at once.
     
  12. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    Bumping this owo
     
  13. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    It's bump o' clock, and this thread is looking extra barren...
     
  14. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    It's bump o' clock.
     
  15. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    It's bump time. Enjoy the thread spam.
     
  16. Theeef

    Theeef God of 4 AM Profession Rants HERO

    Messages:
    2,231
    Likes Received:
    1,776
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    Bumping these
     
  17. Mox gang uwu

    Mox gang uwu uwo owu HERO

    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    148
    Trophy Points:
    59
    Guild:
    Minecraft:
    idk fam, this suggestion might sound good on paper, but it just buffs subs and lags Wynn as a whole (It's laggy enough), thank you for (not) reading my suggestion, I'm gonna go back to hunting Royal Cake Slices
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.