There will be a TERA PC Maintenance on Thursday (3/01) from 8-11 a.m. PST

Constructive Feedback for EME in Regards to Tera

12467

Comments

  • Yordaddy wrote: »
    @Spacecats do you think CU:Velika is an upgrade or downgrade compared to Alliance?
    And to be more specific, does CU:Velika offer more (pvp) gameplay time than Alliance did?
    Is CU:Velika occupying more people than Alliance did?
    also is there any other factor that makes CU:Velika superior to Alliance?

    They're similar but different beasts. Not really an upgrade/downgrade situation (even though obviously one was removed shortly before the other was introduced.) Sorry I realize that's sort of a non-answer. If you're just asking my personal opinion, there's a world where both could exist simultaneously or in rotation.

    As to the TERA dev team's long term plans (outside what we post on the Dev Roadmap), and the number of participants playing one vs. the other, I'm unable to say. Please don't let that stop good feedback, though. If you think Alliance was the best and still want to see it return, say why and I'll happily pass it on.
  • Spacecats wrote: »
    Yordaddy wrote: »
    @Spacecats do you think CU:Velika is an upgrade or downgrade compared to Alliance?
    And to be more specific, does CU:Velika offer more (pvp) gameplay time than Alliance did?
    Is CU:Velika occupying more people than Alliance did?
    also is there any other factor that makes CU:Velika superior to Alliance?

    They're similar but different beasts. Not really an upgrade/downgrade situation (even though obviously one was removed shortly before the other was introduced.) Sorry I realize that's sort of a non-answer. If you're just asking my personal opinion, there's a world where both could exist simultaneously or in rotation.

    As to the TERA dev team's long term plans (outside what we post on the Dev Roadmap), and the number of participants playing one vs. the other, I'm unable to say. Please don't let that stop good feedback, though. If you think Alliance was the best and still want to see it return, say why and I'll happily pass it on.

    I would like to see alliance return because it was something we could do everyday and at different times for those playing in different time zones. also the rewards didn't break the economy or anything. civil unrest is only once a week and the 2 guilds on each server that win it every week are the only ones benefitting from it. hopefully if you bring back alliance territories, we will be able to fly on our mounts, and to even make it better, the bams that are there, use them as the iod bams ( in all 3 territories ), and let us have the original iod back. babysitting island is not fun at all.
  • Spacecats wrote: »
    Yordaddy wrote: »
    @Spacecats do you think CU:Velika is an upgrade or downgrade compared to Alliance?
    And to be more specific, does CU:Velika offer more (pvp) gameplay time than Alliance did?
    Is CU:Velika occupying more people than Alliance did?
    also is there any other factor that makes CU:Velika superior to Alliance?

    They're similar but different beasts. Not really an upgrade/downgrade situation (even though obviously one was removed shortly before the other was introduced.) Sorry I realize that's sort of a non-answer. If you're just asking my personal opinion, there's a world where both could exist simultaneously or in rotation.

    As to the TERA dev team's long term plans (outside what we post on the Dev Roadmap), and the number of participants playing one vs. the other, I'm unable to say. Please don't let that stop good feedback, though. If you think Alliance was the best and still want to see it return, say why and I'll happily pass it on.

    I think Alliance was much better than CU, also please equalize premade skyring that would be very nice thanks.
  • AmmutsebaAmmutseba ✭✭✭
    FRA53HTKHC wrote: »
    Tera is probably by far my favorite MMO. I started playing awhile ago. Not the oldest of player base but up there. I have quit a few times and come back because I get bored of other games I am playing really fast because there is no hook. Now before I get judged on this next statement, I know everyone is entitled to an opinion, but there is one game I have played and always go back to time and time again and there is a reason. That game is Runescape.

    Now before I get a lot of "OMG you still play Runescape???", yes there are quite a few people who still play and enjoy it as I do. Just like all games Runescape has had its ups and downs. They had peak players in middle of 2007, but they did one patch that destroyed their game. This was the removal of free trade and their player base plummeted. Now you might be wondering what does this have to do with Tera, BHS and EME? Well at their peak Jagex lost touch with their player base, something they had previously prided themselves on. Constantly talking to their plays, listening to suggestions and when they stopped Runescape started to decline. Even with the release of RS3 a more graphicly updated version couldn't bring back players.
    BHS and EME are doing the same thing. They keep trying to release new classes to draw players in. They add new cosmetics to attract a certain type or player. Wells that's fine and dandy but how do you make them stay? Your content hasn't changed. Your end game hasn't changed. After awhile Jagex realized they had lost touch with their player base and it needed to change. They started doing polls for upcoming patches, they asked what players wanted to see introduced into the game. Now you have OSRS, which is based on the game back in 2007, and RS3 for those who want a newer up to date version. Both of which have weekly polls on the upcoming patches. Any new major update is polled before implementation, they take player suggestions and feedback. And due to all this both RS3 and OSRS are seeing an INCREASE in population.

    It's not too late for Tera to be saved. In my opinion I agree with @Viauxi and that Tera could be a gem in a pile of all the other MMO's and those that are released daily. Tera has the best combat system I have found of any other online game and numerous games attempt to copy it. So why let any other game climb above Tera when Tera could be the trend-setter? I understand creating a game and running it is a business but why make decisions for a business that is dying because you are losing your income because you don't listen? Jagex is gaining player base back because they are listening to their players (and are still cheaper than Tera elite, 75$ for a whole year compared to 175$ for Tera). They introduce new content monthly not "better" gear. If BHS or EME started listening to player base on what is to come then I believe Tera could be saved.

    Here is a link to the video about the rise and fall and rise again of jagex if anyone is interested:



    To be honest, I feel everyone at EME and BHS should watch this and learn a thing or too. I love my Tera and I want people to play with. I don't want to wait 45 minutes to find a dungeon. I don't want to spend 6 months to get the best in slot gear only for the next best thing to come out a week later. I want Tera to be the game I know it can be if only someone would listen.

    I think it would be great if Bluehole could get take some inspiration from Runescape (Jagex). The real take away from the continual success of Runescape is to listen to and engage with the community. Here are some of the things Runescape does right:

    - Content constantly added and updated
    - Major game enhancements over time
    - Legacy Mode
    - Several mini games
    - Cross-platform play between mobile and desktop
    - Friendly community
    - Communication between the player base and developers

    Jagex started out as a family company, so they have a much different mindset than a normal corporation. Also, Jagex is focused on Runescape and nothing else (they're not going to just drop support for the game to focus on other projects).

    Other games aside, I'll keep rooting for Tera and hope that the Bluehole team can implement some of the community suggestions.
  • papy10kpapy10k ✭✭✭
    Spacecats wrote: »
    Yordaddy wrote: »
    @Spacecats do you think CU:Velika is an upgrade or downgrade compared to Alliance?
    And to be more specific, does CU:Velika offer more (pvp) gameplay time than Alliance did?
    Is CU:Velika occupying more people than Alliance did?
    also is there any other factor that makes CU:Velika superior to Alliance?

    They're similar but different beasts. Not really an upgrade/downgrade situation (even though obviously one was removed shortly before the other was introduced.) Sorry I realize that's sort of a non-answer. If you're just asking my personal opinion, there's a world where both could exist simultaneously or in rotation.

    As to the TERA dev team's long term plans (outside what we post on the Dev Roadmap), and the number of participants playing one vs. the other, I'm unable to say. Please don't let that stop good feedback, though. If you think Alliance was the best and still want to see it return, say why and I'll happily pass it on.

    CU is for one guild. THE BIG ZERG guild wins. ( that's not the essence of pvp )
    Alliance was for the whole server and last a whole week. PvP was also easy to find while doing keys or bams.
  • Ammutseba wrote: »
    FRA53HTKHC wrote: »
    Tera is probably by far my favorite MMO. I started playing awhile ago. Not the oldest of player base but up there. I have quit a few times and come back because I get bored of other games I am playing really fast because there is no hook. Now before I get judged on this next statement, I know everyone is entitled to an opinion, but there is one game I have played and always go back to time and time again and there is a reason. That game is Runescape.

    Now before I get a lot of "OMG you still play Runescape???", yes there are quite a few people who still play and enjoy it as I do. Just like all games Runescape has had its ups and downs. They had peak players in middle of 2007, but they did one patch that destroyed their game. This was the removal of free trade and their player base plummeted. Now you might be wondering what does this have to do with Tera, BHS and EME? Well at their peak Jagex lost touch with their player base, something they had previously prided themselves on. Constantly talking to their plays, listening to suggestions and when they stopped Runescape started to decline. Even with the release of RS3 a more graphicly updated version couldn't bring back players.
    BHS and EME are doing the same thing. They keep trying to release new classes to draw players in. They add new cosmetics to attract a certain type or player. Wells that's fine and dandy but how do you make them stay? Your content hasn't changed. Your end game hasn't changed. After awhile Jagex realized they had lost touch with their player base and it needed to change. They started doing polls for upcoming patches, they asked what players wanted to see introduced into the game. Now you have OSRS, which is based on the game back in 2007, and RS3 for those who want a newer up to date version. Both of which have weekly polls on the upcoming patches. Any new major update is polled before implementation, they take player suggestions and feedback. And due to all this both RS3 and OSRS are seeing an INCREASE in population.

    It's not too late for Tera to be saved. In my opinion I agree with @Viauxi and that Tera could be a gem in a pile of all the other MMO's and those that are released daily. Tera has the best combat system I have found of any other online game and numerous games attempt to copy it. So why let any other game climb above Tera when Tera could be the trend-setter? I understand creating a game and running it is a business but why make decisions for a business that is dying because you are losing your income because you don't listen? Jagex is gaining player base back because they are listening to their players (and are still cheaper than Tera elite, 75$ for a whole year compared to 175$ for Tera). They introduce new content monthly not "better" gear. If BHS or EME started listening to player base on what is to come then I believe Tera could be saved.

    Here is a link to the video about the rise and fall and rise again of jagex if anyone is interested:



    To be honest, I feel everyone at EME and BHS should watch this and learn a thing or too. I love my Tera and I want people to play with. I don't want to wait 45 minutes to find a dungeon. I don't want to spend 6 months to get the best in slot gear only for the next best thing to come out a week later. I want Tera to be the game I know it can be if only someone would listen.

    I think it would be great if Bluehole could get take some inspiration from Runescape (Jagex). The real take away from the continual success of Runescape is to listen to and engage with the community. Here are some of the things Runescape does right:

    - Content constantly added and updated
    - Major game enhancements over time
    - Legacy Mode
    - Several mini games
    - Cross-platform play between mobile and desktop
    - Friendly community
    - Communication between the player base and developers

    Jagex started out as a family company, so they have a much different mindset than a normal corporation. Also, Jagex is focused on Runescape and nothing else (they're not going to just drop support for the game to focus on other projects).

    Other games aside, I'll keep rooting for Tera and hope that the Bluehole team can implement some of the community suggestions.



    PvP related part of Runescape but sort of relatable to TERA, skyring etc is not rewarding enough also should be equalized premade etc. Alliance > CU.
  • papy10kpapy10k ✭✭✭
    BHS needs to know that NA and KR are not the same.
    In NA we like to beat the sh#$ out of each other, we create drama and that motivates people to get gear and practice to get good at pvp.
    bringing back an updated version of Alliance will probably revive pvp in NA.
  • CezzareCezzare ✭✭✭
    It was an interesting reading, I agree on some points, not about all of them, though.

    - Island of Dawn

    To be honest, as much as I liked how the old IoD looked, I really found it to be annoying after the 5th character, most of the time was spenp solely on traveling from point to point, and while some might say it was worth the time since the scenery was nice, man, you could come back to it anytime (before it was changed, of course), it wasn't like the reaper's starting zone. I started playing on 2013 and back then the only interesting thing it had is that it featured quests for the charm and gathering systems, but that's all, there were no BAMs in the open map zone (except for Vekas, maybe) and since Karascha was so easy to beat there wasn't really any need to party inside the mini dungeon.

    - Classic MMORPG or an action one?

    I think the devs have some kind of existential dilemma at this point: if they're really trying to sell Tera as an action title, then the leveling process's relevance is questionable, but the game still has a story quest and a character gearing systems that are closely bound to the leveling process, something more common to RPGs that to action games. There are a good couple of issues with that.

    - Character progression & leveling

    It has been said many times that the main reason theres's no class change voucher might be that it would go somehow against the game's bussiness model, which consists on making you create many different characters so you buy stuff for all of them. Now, those who want a class change voucher say it's useful because somtimes you reach level cap only to realize you don't really like the class you picked, but I think the fact it takes you so long to realize you like a class or not is a design flaw itself, look at gunners, ninjas, brawlers and valks, at level 30 you have a quite accurate idea of how does those classes's gameplay will be at level cap, but for archers and warriors, for example, you don't experience it until past level 58, and with slayers is after level 61, that's just plain stupid.

    If I were given liberty to make changes regarding the problems with the level 1-64 progress while trying to keep the effort at minimum, I would try this:

    To start with, if they really intentd to keep the leveling systemv then they need to fix the rate at which each class gets their core skills, you shouldn't need to reach level 50 to know if a class feels good to play with. Crafting could become part of some of the story quests, maybe some of the vanguard quests from level 1-64 can be about crafting stuff. About the equipment from 1-64, to be honest I couldn't care less about avatar weapons, I know how to roll weapons for leveling and where to grind exp, but they make it faster for me to level up alts, therefore I don't dislike them. I agree that they could bring back solo dungeons and adjust the story quests so they allowed you to either run those or the 5-player ones, perhaps they could tweak the solo version so the mobs in there give you less exp compared to the party instances.

    - Low level PvP

    I vouch for having low-level versions of the PvP instances, specifically low level versions of FWC and 3v3, however, this might have a negative impact on the queue times for Kumas Royale. Another thing I would try is the followning:

    Very visible, with lots of signaling around it, I would put a new NPC in all towns and cities, maybe in camps too. This NPC would do two things only:

    1.- Automatically set up deathmatches for you. Upon selecting the option, it would let you choose the team size and would randomly accomodate players who request to join the match.

    2.- Do exactly the same thing dungeon teleportals do: show you the matching system for you and let you queue for the BG available.

    If resources weren't a problem, I would also like to see the Alliance instances and conflict come back, maybe I would remove the gold reward for exarch and commanders and instead grant the winning alliance an enchantment advantage bonus (a noticeable one, that is), a nice flying mount, alliance-related cosmetics and so on, all requiring you to constantly get alliance reputation, to avoid those cases of people who only became echelons to get the mask but wouldn't participate in the weekly confilct. Also, offering some crystals or other goods in the alliance shop could be a good incentive on itself to run it. The idea would be to give QoL rewards instead of direct resources so the content looks appealing but not enough to justify the time and effort to monopolize it.

    I also have other ideas regarding end game gear progression and crafting, but I'm not so sure about those.
  • @Spacecats Why is alliance better than CU?

    First of all lets take for granted that nobody runs CU expect some few guilds. Just look at the rankings. Same has been said by many ppl in this thread and others. So this is not so much a comparison as a list of all the alliance benefits we used to have and lost.

    So here's some arguments in favor of Alliance:

    Alliance lasted the whole week
    daily quests, gave ppl something to do when they don't wanna run dungeons, and most importantly filled the void between patch cycles for more experienced players.

    Before gold was nerfed it was also a very nice source of income, well earned, as well as a source for noctenium infusions which would be used in dungeons. The gold and infusions were there for anyone to gather so this was limiting or discriminating anyone in any way.

    The one thing that desperately needed fixing here, was the fact that one would run content for one week to rank, and then actually be part of conflict during the weekend AFTER. This was confusing for many guildies who felt that they had no immediate reward, got disssapointed and lost interest. This happened to a lot of my guildies in the summer of 2015 when I was trying to get them to be interested in alliance dailies for fun.
    Main benefit: More gameplay time per user. Increases game population. More chance user spends money in this game.

    For a PvE server Alliance is a gateway to real PvP
    without getting equalized gear as happens in BGs, and most important you got into PvP only when you wanted to. Otherwise we would all join pvp servers. I don't see this being offered in game anymore therefore it's a lost feature.
    Main benefit: Attracts players who are interested in a balance of PvP and PvE. Increases game population.

    For a PvE server it allows guilds to exist as PvP guilds
    We used to have a PvE/PvP/Social category for guilds. For TR there's no meaning into PvP guild as it is now, and social is hard to pull when you have a cap on population.
    Main benefit: Same as above.

    Alliance conflict made guilds come together (chat channel)
    Before guild patch we used to have guilds of 300 ppl. Now they're downsized to a third at best. Alliance conflict allowed ppl to micromanage in guilds but at the same time be part of something bigger. Most important we had an alliance channel. We trolled, discussed socialized in that channel to such extend that as soon as alliance was gone, in TR some ppl from Enlightened Union (Chibi Tiger) created a private chat channel to emulate alliance which exists to this day. With the downsizing of the guilds this is needed more than ever.

    I've had ppl discuss how in some other MMOs you can be part of multiple guilds with the same character, and I also had ppl say that this feature was never really done right. Alliance grouping of guilds was a perfect ecosystem.
    Main benefit: More socializing, makes game appear less dead.

    It provided player prestige by rank and skill
    Being exarch allowed you to pop notices to your whole alliance. Having any of the officer masks was prestige ppl still call for nowadays.
    While in alliance territories I remember ppl taking it upon themselves to be the protectors of alliance territories.
    Players like prestige. They gear for it, they rank for it. Alliance was a big source of prestige. It kept ppl playing.
    Main benefit: Attracts players in the game. Increases game population.

    It could have been a potential source of income for EME
    Something never utilized by EME or BHS. I wouldn't want to see specific PvP purchasable items because it would turn PvP to p2w also, but I can think of many ways to utilize the commercial side of this game aspect. The grind alone would probably yield some income for EME, but we could also have alliance specific costumes/mounts. Purchasable from store but only used within alliance territories. You need to remember there were lots of ppl who used to spend a LOT of time in those areas.
    Now how you gonna sell CU? Purchase costume for guild? you can do that without CU. Costume for that 1 hour of playtime per week? Alliance was daily and unrestricted on time.

    I don't care if EME is rich other than channeling richness in development. I don't expect the game as it is today to bother developers to fix it. This is the very reason of posts like this one, to try to get tera in a better shape, to get more ppl online, so EME makes more money and then delivers us more features.
    Main benefit: EME has more money to spend on development

    The Alliance content made full sense with the Lore and made Alliance halls relevant
    To return to the main point that started this thread, we had a whole nice cinematic of how ppl fought over Noctenium, and a quest to go with it at level 60, before fate of Arun. It made full sense.

    More than that, we had Alliance halls. We now have empty buildings all over that are used for nothing. These were the main hangout hubs in the game, filled with life. this is also related to the Lore and the general exploration of the open world. Ppl would hang out in Alemanthea and Kaiator. Nobody visits those regions now.
    Main benefit: Much more polished game for the ppl who care. Attracs more players in game, increases game population.

    The Gold Enchanter (HALLELUYAH)
    For many ppl this is a self sufficient reason to be in alliance, and do daily quests to have enough points to summon this guy.
    To those who never experienced this, this was an NPC who would increase your chances of successful enchantment significantly (from 0.0000000001% to 0.0000000002%). This was the only time you would try to enchant high gear.
    Main benefit: 1 hour enchantment buff per week. Players can gear easier. Does not have to be a whole weekend event which could disrupt the gear balancing in game.

    The reason I posted those 2 questions earlier, is to break down the problem to simple variables. I think many many more ppl played Alliance than CU and for much more time over the week hence it was better than what we have. Players left because of it.

    Having said that, there were very obvious problems with the state of Alliance. A guildie rightfully pointed out by the time Alliance went away it had rendered irrelevant. Good PvP players were not interested because there was no reward, and more PvE players managed to rank which didn't even showup for Conflict.
    Listing negative stuff that have to be fixed for Alliance to work again:

    Exploits from guilds
    at the end in TR server, we had one guild, Radioactive, that rulled all 3 alliances with alt guilds and had a fixed outcome on who was going to win. More or less like CU is now.

    There was also much guild-hopping every week for ppl to join the right guild and right alliance they knew would win. People suggested longer timeouts on guild quit, and making it more difficult for whole guilds to change alliance.

    To fix this we need a whole new thread. I'm sure many ppl have suggestions and arguments over this. It will require some clever algorithm or GM Monitoring.

    GM misdirected/unbalanced bans
    when GMs tried to take control of the exploits it usually ended up in the wrong ppl getting banned.
    I had friends from other guilds getting banned for feeding themselves kills (to match other ppl feeding themselves kills).
    Meanwhile having the same guild accross 3 alliances, with the same freakin guild logo all over, didn't bother any GM apparently.

    Low levels in alliance territories
    easy to fix. Low levels would get into alliance territories and act as feeders. make it 65 only and one part of the problem is gone. It made no sense for low levels to be in pvp at all, since they would get one shotted by anyone 3-4 levels above.

    Feeding kills to rank and the whole ranking system
    As mentioned above, ppl ranked by feeding themselves kills either through alts or friendly players. The ranking system gave points for a kill, but did not deduct anything for a death. That meant I could have 3 characters logged on 3 tera instances at the same time, find a corner and spam kill myself to exarch. no penalty for any of the deaths.
    There needs to be a clever algorithm in place to not allow feeding. I don't have an answer ready for this at this moment.

    PvE quests for PvP content did not attract PvP players.
    Transferring the concerns of a guildie of mine, who was quite active in it, she makes a point that there was too much PvE content in alliance territories, for ranking in PvP. This allowed non-skilled PvP players (such as myself) to rank high and didn't even join Conflict later.

    In order for alliance to be attractive for all PvP players is to bring the best PvP players in the mix.
    I would be ok to know that I will never rank because ppl are better than me. I only made it into Defence Commander anyway. Perhaps there would be other rewards for less skilled ppl. Players would not have ground to complain if the ranking system is fair.

    Afking during conflict
    allowed players to reap whatever benefits. A guildie of mine led an IO raid sometime in Autumn 2015 as exarch. He just wanted the mask for that alt of his, and since IO was trully dead managed to rank high. He got a bunch of akers and waited in IO fort to be killed. Posing no threat, EU and FT turned on each other, the winner would kill IO and take the prize.

    EU and FT managed to kill each other's exarch within seconds and IO was the last guild standing in game. My guildie got the 70k by afkind in IO fort.

    Place afk timeouts in a matter of minutes when in Alliance territories and in conflict. (not so hard to do is it? I think it exists already in game since it kicks me out if I don't move after 2-3 hours). Kicking ppl out of Alliance territories if they're inactive would also decrase easy afk kills.

    Allowing overpowered Alliances (and bandwagoning)
    Once an alliance was well established ppl would all try to hop to that alliance leaving other alliances dead. Conflict often resulted to a matter of 2 instead of 3 because of this.

    This is easy to fix in my opinion, following an american sports logic: Give benefits to the loser.
    The alliance that came last would have a benefit in the next week. Combined with guild hopping timeouts this would improve things a lot.

    Bottom line, I'm taking time from work to post this, and it shouldn't be my job to design Alliance all over again. Why not making a dedicated thread, where you prune most of the non-sensical comments and the community would provide all the feedback you want? I might be all wrong in all of the points I made in this. If you make it clear that EME is considering to bring alliance back if you solve the problems, then I'm sure ppl will respond. Keep in mind that half the points above are NOT my own ideas, they come from guildies.

    Also for those who don't know what Alliance was,
    here's the summary
    http://tera.enmasse.com/alliance
    here's the story
    http://tera.enmasse.com/alliance-story
    and here's the guide
    http://tera.enmasse.com/alliance-guide
    published by EME, detailing how nice the Alliance features were. (Don't you dare remove it EME).

    At the moment there's no other MMO with TERA combat. BDO is not exactly the same and has no PvE. There's no MMO hyped for 2018. TERA could have another 1-2 major years if only EME decides to bring back old content and wrap up the existing one. It baffles the mind how ppl are not jumping at this opportunity at this time.

    P.S. If you ever bring Conflict back, make it into a more Europe-friendly hour please. I know Gameforge is suppose to keep european population, but lets face it, there are more europeans on NA than on EU. So make it 1-2 hours earlier at least than what it was. For central european time that's still feasible.

    P.S.2 and one more suggestion:
    Make awakened skills as Noctenium reliant
    As far as I know there will be a gold consumption to purchase awakened skills. Make it purchasable by noctenium instead. Make awakened skills burn noctenium. Make alliances mine noctenium actively though the extractors (which can be destroyed/interrupted by players).

    Then sit back, get popcorn and watch the madness unfold.

    Also if you do this, include a stock broker in game, where you can play on prices of Gold, Noctenium and Bitcoin please.

    P.S.3 Now that I finished this post. I realise what a waste of time it was. Still one can dream...
  • papy10kpapy10k ✭✭✭
    edited January 5
  • ArdireArdire ✭✭✭✭✭
    Spacecats wrote: »
    Yordaddy wrote: »
    @Spacecats do you think CU:Velika is an upgrade or downgrade compared to Alliance?
    And to be more specific, does CU:Velika offer more (pvp) gameplay time than Alliance did?
    Is CU:Velika occupying more people than Alliance did?
    also is there any other factor that makes CU:Velika superior to Alliance?

    They're similar but different beasts. Not really an upgrade/downgrade situation (even though obviously one was removed shortly before the other was introduced.) Sorry I realize that's sort of a non-answer. If you're just asking my personal opinion, there's a world where both could exist simultaneously or in rotation.

    As to the TERA dev team's long term plans (outside what we post on the Dev Roadmap), and the number of participants playing one vs. the other, I'm unable to say. Please don't let that stop good feedback, though. If you think Alliance was the best and still want to see it return, say why and I'll happily pass it on.

    i... but.... were you even around for alliance? how can you answer that question if you weren't even around when the content was... or am i high and not remembering [filtered] correctly

    anyway alliance was a thousand times better than CU by miles and miles. alliance had so much more to do and offer to everyone, dude above me described it all pretty well.

    sincerely self-proclaimed invisibam enthusiast
  • FRSTYFRSTY ✭✭
    Alliance also gave more opportunity for solo-players(Using an Alliance specific guild: Enlightened Union 13..) to join in and get some rewards as well, CU is only for the top guilds, not individuals.
  • Ardire wrote: »
    i... but.... were you even around for alliance? how can you answer that question if you weren't even around when the content was... or am i high and not remembering [filtered] correctly

    Yeah I was here :)

    I was about 5 months into the job and worked with Treeshark as he created the Last Crusade event. I didn't get to witness Alliance in its prime, but I did play it and watched a lot of players that ran it regularly before it was removed.
  • LyanniLyanni ✭✭
    edited January 5
    Yordaddy wrote: »

    Exploits from guilds
    at the end in TR server, we had one guild, Radioactive, that rulled all 3 alliances with alt guilds and had a fixed outcome on who was going to win. More or less like CU is now.

    There was also much guild-hopping every week for ppl to join the right guild and right alliance they knew would win. People suggested longer timeouts on guild quit, and making it more difficult for whole guilds to change alliance.

    To fix this we need a whole new thread. I'm sure many ppl have suggestions and arguments over this. It will require some clever algorithm or GM Monitoring.

    I remember that part. I remember they even did some exploits like getting a priest passing through the mountains glitching to the EU base and then summon the whole raid.
    I even saw that twice, then i asked a couple of people to plant those anti invisible totems in the exact spot the priest would appear. We got him that time, but another one appeared right after.
    There was a lot of other exploits where they would get to some spots faster (i have no idea how, but i tested it once and got one of them to get me in a place where a normal person couldnt get there in time).
    Like for example, when the timers for PvP time started everyone would get teleported to their base (in that map), one FT got to the side of EU spot faster than I (an EU member) got there.
    I even open tickets with screenshots and videos, nothing was done.

    I liked Alliance, it was fun, but a lot would have to change for it to be fair.

  • edited January 5
    I'll add my 2 cents. Get rid of story all together, because it's tedious and takes too long. Make it Vanguards and dungeons to level. Keep it the pace it is to level when doing dungeons. People complaining about getting yelled at or kicked off the party for being noobs should play on the PVE servers, and join a good guild that supports noobs. I've never had trouble on there. When I was on PVP it was a toxic experience for sure.
Sign In or Register to comment.