forums wiki bugs items changes map login play now

Trim Cabal Numbers

We kicked this around for a few minutes last night in disco. Thoughts?

-Reduce cabal max from 8 to 4 or 5

  • 1 L, 1 or 2 E, 2 or 3 T or lower

-1 max caballed char per person?

There could be some weird fallout from doing something like this, I guess. I think it would push people to enrich and focus on a "main" character more. Everybody would still have alts, obviously, but wihtout cabal pressures we might end up seeing alt characters that aren't quite so....optimized race/class-wise. No guarantee there, but I kinda think that if people knew their second/third/whatever char wasn't going to be caballed, they may be more flexible in design. Just kicking around ideas here, looking for a discussion - before you post, remind yourself not to go zero-to-100 mph aggro. Save the flame drama for your momma. ❤️

I feel like we tried this before, but I can't remember exactly..

BUT!

I think we are at a place, numbers wise, where this would be beneficial. You will always have a cabal that is fairly stacked because if Knight, for instance, happens to get two top tier PKers, then they are naturally going to "take over", but reducing the number will make people join other cabals. I know people are pretty adverse to being forced into anything or not being allowed to play in a manner they want, but in a world where a cabal has seven members and their opposing cabal has one, I see no other way. If this does happen, it would of course have to happen through attrition.

OR!

Give incentives to join those other cabals. If the numbers hit a 2:1 ration, then when you're inducted you skip the (I)nductee period and jump straight to member. 

I'd love to see cabal numbers reduced and a pwipe happen...

Yup there needs to be incentives else you'd have a bunch of people just waiting in line feeling forced.

Although I support this to a certain point, I do not believe it will help overall. If anything it may deter some people from wanting to even play due to the fact that the game would "fall flat" to them. Limiting Cabal Numbers is nice in theory as well as it means Cabals with low numbers now have fewer people to go up against. This however also stifles creativity. Think of it like this. Do you think there would be high RP characters like what we have seen come from Knight and Nexus if those Cabals are full? Probably not. Sure, we'd see fewer crap characters, but we'd also see more "blah" type characters than anything else.

By limiting the amount of characters you can have in a Cabal means you're forcing some people to play a certain way. I'm very open to the idea of people having multiple Qclass/Qrace characters, but I'm part of a small portion of players on this front. I also am in full support of strong hour checks for rares too though and every time I've tried to push it, other Vets have clearly stated they'd rather leave than have to deal with those kinds of hours since 20 can be more than enough for some. I do realize that people who have limited time would find it difficult to achieve because of family/job/school, so I stopped trying to say we needed to raise it despite the fact that rare circulation is horrible at times.

This idea does kind of fix some of those issues, but it also nails some of the other issues from other players. The reason why  I do not outright support a limit on lower numbers in a Cabal is because I don't fully believe that players should know how to PK excessively which with fewer members the ones with far better PK are always going to get in while others will continue to struggle. It means if you're going to be RP oriented then you're going to need to find a Cabal that allows you to RP more than PK. Many people who play will get a Qclass/Qrace and play them for a very short period of time with very few exceptions to that. The ones who stop usually get beat horribly bad or just get killed and they stop playing the character/delete the character. If they stop, the lower number cap means it sits there for a while. Got in at the beginning of the month? Well that's a spot that will be taken for nearly two months. It's not feasible and you don't know for sure if that person will come back or not. If they do and they've been booted a lot of other things can happen good or bad that no one else may enjoy either.

There's nothing stopping anyone from sticking with one character though. It takes me a VERY long time to find something I actually enjoy, and even if I enjoy it that doesn't mean I'll ever get passed 400 hours. I have had characters with very strong RP make it to 300 hours without issue, but RP isn't enough so I get bored and I'm always thinking of new concepts to try out. At my peak of playing characters because I can't find something I enjoy it's usually like 5 characters and 3 of them are in a Cabal, but it's usually the Cabal itself that I realize stifled their RP. A Cabal is there to give people an edge in some fashion or another, but in most cases we come to find out it stifles us to some degree. Going Uncabaled means you have free reign in both areas to a very small degree not being good, where adding in a Cabal means you're stuck in that Cabal unless you quit the Cabal and in some of those cases it means you may have enemies after you because of it.

Stifling creativity is essentially all this is really doing despite the positive side of it overall. I understand where it's coming from and I've at one point or another thought about this or mentioned it, but with the smaller player base we have left, we don't want to alienate those who are playing because of the ability to have such freedoms. The character I've had the longest was Egui Aome back in like 2005 with 1200 hours. I only played them for the most part, but after a few hundred hours I got bored and rolled other characters. Longevity has its downsides as well. Though the characters are rich, it gets boring as hell reiterating things repeatedly over that period of time. If things don't change in a character chances are they're going to delete because they've been around for so long. I finally deleted because I was so tired of them and I haven't come close since then to playing that long on a character. That's not to say everyone is like that, but would you rather be forced to have one character with all the perks that you find out you absolutely hate every aspect of them, or would you rather have the ability to find your niche in a different set of RP that still allows you to find a different path/cabal that would let you discover new greatness? I'd rather leave it as is than find out that regardless of what I do it wont be good enough to reach your full potential as it is now.

@Fireman Were you around during the last one? I can assure you that that sucked ass. I finally got to level 49 as an Invoker and literally within a weeks time there was a Pwipe. Sure everyone was on the same level again and even playing fields, but it wasn't exactly fun and it kind of pissed me off. Didn't we lose like a third of the player base after that as well? Incentives to join an opposing Cabal is good though. It could give people the option to gain things they couldn't before by playing the Underdog, but it can flip on them at a moments notice too depending on interest in the Cabal. Look at Savant. Back in the day I could bend over any Warmaster at any rank and took out a lot of bigger names 12 years ago without ever even being in Savant. Then I got into Savant and met a Monk who just rocked me completely despite it being very close in the end due to spell damage and an unknown weapon back in like 2004/2005 and now that's not going to happen. Warmaster steamrolls most Savant members so horribly bad that no one wants to play them anymore and changes suggested have only seen to be implemented towards Gladiator benefits rather than anything else.

There's too many issues going on though and although I still do like the idea to some degree overall, but I don't see it really helping us at all and it also hinders newer players coming in from being able to discover what we already know about the game. They'll be forced into a situation that most of us haven't had to deal with for nearly two decades because we already know how it works to some degree adding in the changes we were here to notice while playing. They wont. Help files not being updated as things are changed are much larger issues when it comes to Newbie Friendly parts of the game. I would like to see why others would feel this would benefit the game best though.

I am very much in support of the alternative idea of offering bonuses to underdog cabals, rather than shaving down cabal numbers. Reasoning for this being, fighting the same 2-3 characters can get stale, but if those enemies are mixed up with more comers and goers it stays a bit more interesting. I'm not even against those who try a cabal or a certain combo for a little while and delete at M or V if it doesn't suit them. Still feels like the world is revolving and changing, even if not everyone sees every character all the way through. I even like the jump straight to M idea, and it seems this is already somewhat active if not specifically implemented. By that I mean it seems that players that join vastly outnumbered cabals already climb rank pretty darn quick - and they should.

Edited

This seems like a horrible idea. Even the smaller cabals around the moment are just shy of 4 members. We would end up in situations where a cabal would be full for months and months on end, sometimes with characters that are around less than the people that're wanting to join.

I just don't see the problem of people having multiple characters if that's their thing.

How about the underdogs would be allowed to be promoted straight to T based off hours played? Or even the hours played for each rank would be halved for them? That way it gives players an incentive to try out a Cabal they may not have tried in the past or even a different subcabal to see how well it works with their own  play styles rather than anything else. We're probably not going to see anyone regardless sticking with a single character for long periods of time. Sometimes we don't have the time to do so which means they'll probably play that one character for a long time, but that's more of a circumstance to the player themselves. However I wouldn't mind seeing a purge system that allows a player to purge their own characters  based off their IP address and characters played. That could perhaps help some of the rare issues as well. Even so though it's not really needed overall.

I'm definitely down for 2 characters allowed per IP address, so there can be a main and alt. Would also limit rare hoarding.

2 hours ago, Zhurong said:

I'm definitely down for 2 characters allowed per IP address, so there can be a main and alt. Would also limit rare hoarding.

I'm actually relatively okay with this as well.

Limiting characters in cabals was tested recently.

Very bad idea.

PS. Holy crap Tant....

PPS. People should not be forced into playing certain way, but promoted. IMMs tried to force people to RP for so long and failed. The moment when a system that promotes good RP with proper rewards came up, everyone started trying to RP.

It's the same with cabals. People should be promoted heavily for playing against the odds and sticking to their guns.

Edited

What if it was limited in a different way?

Instead of hard coded finite limits, it became a floating variable.

Cabal limit = Enemy current +/- 2 based on current PK records of existing Cabal Members.

if there are 4 Nexus with a mean of 80% PK success, knight could have 6 members.

4 nexus with a mean of 60% PK success, Knight could have 5 members.

4 Nexus with a mean of 40% PK success Knight can not have more members than Nexus.

Just a thought.

It would fluctuate way to often, the # allowed could potentially change every few hours, or days.

What happens if you have 5 Knights and all of a sudden your formula only allows 4 Knights?

I don't think this would work.

It is rare these days for a cabal to have a full 8 members, and even when it happens there are almost always several inactive members.

I do not see any downside in lowering the limit to say 6 members in each cabal.

The thing is it wouldn't really change anything since the playerbase in general sorts itself out.

When one cabal rises to the top a lot of players actively roll in the opposing cabal.

Won't affect me. #herald4life

8 hours ago, Fool_Hardy said:

Just a thought.

Or how about we don't trim anything (because we've tried that already and it was bad), but instead give incentive to play in "underdog" cabals?