World of Warcraft®

Already been said this does not go against Blizzard lore as nothing was really destroyed.

Anyhoo, massive battle go go!

But would it be too much to ask to have the date/time be sent via AA private message to each unit leader that still remains in the campain? I am sure griefers show up anyways but this might improve the situation just a bit.

Also should be made sure that whoever wants unrestircted pvp can get it but not in the mix of the ones who are going by restrcitions. Aka Blackguard + Stormguard get to pewpew a bit on the side? Not far enough obviusly that they would feel left out but not close enough for them to make others growl.

One big massive battle. The people with the most victory points should be given health/ability advantages though, playing into account the likeliness that they have better supplies/morale/fitness

One thing to consider would be Wargames - then there is no fear of random griefers. AV or IoC both host 40vs40 battle, might have to make multiple wargames if there's lot of people involved (which there probably would be). Either as actual game with trying to win the objectives or just use the large open areas for massive battle - Field of Strife in AV is quite good for that and would fit with the scenery.

As an "outsider" [that is to say, been at work during all the RPPvP engagements] with similar experience in toy soldier games, I too like the idea of having the last grand battle to end the campaign:

1) with location based on current victory points at the finale;
2) with starting unit orientation based on victory points and unit successes through the campaign;
3) with two distinct adjacent fields for restricted and unrestricted [perhaps with a band of "/duel" in the middle to divide them?] to cater to preferences.

Campaign victory determines location of the finale, and the tactical and strategic advantages available during unit placement.

Alterac Valley wargame makes perfect sense and would be beautiful. 40 a side is big enough to seem pitched, too. Plus you can work your asses off and have fun things like RPing gathering for the Ice Lord, or Ram Cavalry. <3 A few hours of tactical fights with NPCs, recordings of gryphon bombing runs, cavalry charges... archers firing down from towers.

Do iiiiiit.

Niars' idea is also brilliant, 'though there may well be more than 40 a side wanting to be involved.

Perhaps more than one wargame then? =)

I'm not a fan of massive events - the graphics glut murders my laptop (I had a framerate of 5 in Durnholde even with raid settings) and I have nerdrage when I try to follow RP with more than 4-5 people talking. That said...

27/04/2012 02:30Posted by Kife

One thing to consider would be Wargames - then there is no fear of random griefers. AV or IoC both host 40vs40 battle, might have to make multiple wargames if there's lot of people involved (which there probably would be). Either as actual game with trying to win the objectives or just use the large open areas for massive battle - Field of Strife in AV is quite good for that and would fit with the scenery.

...this sounds pretty awesome.

This campaign has been going on for more than a month, and you should be proud of having been able to build such an epic one. I say yes, it should end this week if I wanted it to end at any point.

Meanwhile, I wish to thank you for making this month this awesome. /Sin'dorei salute.

A combination of Kife and Niars's suggestion with Tsath/Fyne's quid pro quos regarding victory points could be a truly glorious conclusion to the campaign. I have no doubt multiple wargames instances would be required, but that in and of itself would be a great way to subdivide FFA RPPvPers and Rules Based RPPvPers, without either group getting a less epic experience than the other.

I'm with the people voting for /wargames. Truth be told the /duel method doesn't really tickle my fancy, and with wargames at least people can have the option of joining a restricted RP-PvP or an unrestricted one. Although yes, there would definitely have to be at least 3 going on.

I vote Eragorn becomes a massive transformer and fights it out with Amarae, when she undergoes the same transformation.

But seriously! Wargames would be a treat for all involved. One group set aside for the unrestricted RP-PvPers, and two made for the 'rules are life' groups. It'll stop a good amount of groaning!

27/04/2012 02:21Posted by Alexandos

One big massive battle. The people with the most victory points should be given health/ability advantages though, playing into account the likeliness that they have better supplies/morale/fitness

I like the idea. Will do some planning.

27/04/2012 02:30Posted by Kife

One thing to consider would be Wargames - then there is no fear of random griefers. AV or IoC both host 40vs40 battle, might have to make multiple wargames if there's lot of people involved (which there probably would be). Either as actual game with trying to win the objectives or just use the large open areas for massive battle - Field of Strife in AV is quite good for that and would fit with the scenery.

Yes. Except that we wouldn't fit into one raid. Or two raids. Perhaps not even three raids. It would break the people into groups that exist in different places. I would like to bring them all together. But yes, will consider this option too.

27/04/2012 05:12Posted by Morthyn

This campaign has been going on for more than a month, and you should be proud of having been able to build such an epic one. I say yes, it should end this week if I wanted it to end at any point.

Thank you. But it won't end this week. Not in any case. Next week, possibly. But chances are it even still drags on to week 6.

I'm not too fond of the Wargames suggestion, for the reason Baywatcher wrote above. We'd have to split people into several minor groups, leaving people limited to interacting with their chosen opponents.

Open battle might be harder to organize and keep structured, but the payoff is by far the superior choice in my opinion.

Big battle? I'm in.

Hmmm. I kept close tabs on the Pugmans events last night on both sides, and generally heard that the /duel method is lacklustre – the one pro is that griefers and the bads cannot touch you.

However there are far too many down sides:

-You can only attack one person at a time, this means that you can’t, for example, go and save an ally by wedging yourself between them and the enemy, not without cancelling you duel, getting your ally and his opponent to cancel their duel, and then wait for the new one to start up.
-It doesn’t encourage “tactics” or formations because in the end, they’re quite irrelevant when you’re only being attacked by one person at a time and people are not forced to react to your movements because we’re all blue shielded.
-The minimum three seconds for the duel to start would be an utter excitement killer, especially during something like a Talon/BKG charge… 40 Knights charging into the Alliance lines, smashing through the ranks and… standing there for bare minimum 3 seconds, looking for someone who isn’t in a duel – ‘cos lets face it, we’d be charging the flank, but as everyone would be in duels, where is the effect of panic it would instil?
-And it’s also highly unfair on those that don’t get an opponent – 2 vs 1 is hardly an issue in these things, and if the numbers are uneven it at least allows people to contribute, instead of standing around like a wet lemon.
-Pure healer characters get nothing to do, really, other than make sparkly effects, as they can’t heal people who are duelling. So either they’re forced to fight something in a duel, or stand there and waste mana – depriving them of the potential adrenaline of trying to keep everyone up.
-Perhaps 150+ duel flags. Everywhere. Ruining my screenshots.

I would certainly be game for a massive, rulesbased RP-PVP battle somewhere in the world. At the same time, I would also delight for x amount of people on both sides to offer anti-griefing characters to watch over the battle (I suck at true PVP). The time, date, location and plan should be sent to the leaders through the AA to avoid the information being too public. With higher health rules, but keep the damage the same, so there is less chance of people dying. And some sort of buff for the winning side.

Alternatively – Wargames.

What Bananaland said.

Agreed, Baladan. This is the overall feedback and my experience as well. Perhaps we keep the /duel method as a backup system in case the event gets griefed horribly.

More planning, hmm hmm.

^ What Baladan said. Pretty much sums up the problem with Duels. I completely agree. Atmosphere is what we like about these events, because they pretty much sum up what a full on war is like.. heated.. confusing.. fear and general mayhem. War is only glorious to the eyes of the beholder, and each person's view on it will distinctively be different. I say Wargames as an alternative but I thought the Durnhold siege (Being the only one I managed to get online for) worked perfectly well. Albeit this is not because the Horde seemed to do well, its because it was fun and exciting and we got to use tactics. That's an instant eye and braingasm for anyone.