This a quote from a thread that got locked but is well worth talking about.
Sovrath-
"Actually, I think if you took it one step further then it might make castles even more desirable.
Make it so that there are special dungeons that are only acessible to alliances that hold a castle.
This way people might have a greater desire to siege. The dungeons could have particular raid bosses inside them."
In Lineage 1 they did have this for the Windalwood Castle. And Hiene Castle had a gate to the underwater area(Garden of Eva). That could be used during sieges if an attacking clan had a spy in the castle holding clan to let the enemy in. And there was rummors that if the Clan that had Hiene attacked Fur. the water dragon they got speical bouns to it. Aden Castle had Bosses that would siege it and the castle holding clan had to fight them and the attackers at the same time.
Thank you DeathMistress, I was thinking of reviving this thread but didn't know if others were interested in continuing it.
I do feel that having a castle should allow the castle/Alliance holders more rights when it comes to the land associated with the castle.
The idea of the original thread was that Raid Bosses be available to only the castle holders. My thought was that that seemed a bit artificial and that if they were in special dungeons only available to the castle/alliance holders then that would make more sense.
I would really like to see a giant boss that wonders around the castle owning areas that the castle owner alliance can only kill. If they don't kill it, it sieges... Can you imagine an antharas type raid boss at a siege? it would be wicked...
on i side note... who do you think would win 1v1 full buffs... antharas or a siege golem (assuming the golem can hit the dragon, and no kiteing.)
Let castles make Dungeon Castle Passes for teleports to some dungeons from the gatekeepers in the castle towns. It will be up to the current caste owners how to spend these passes.
Let castles make Dungeon Castle Passes for teleports to some dungeons from the gatekeepers in the castle towns. It will be up to the current caste owners how to spend these passes.
Really bad idea, and will only serve to make the game alot worse. Castle owners already have enough perks as it is. It would only further encourage illegal gameplay, since it would now be safe. (not going into details to avoid locking)
It is just the most simple technical implementation of the general idea of this thread (all others are basically the same stuff put in more vague terms). BTW, I don't think it will affect the degree of the unnamed problem ever futher.
Anyway, as said, I don't think castleowners need more perks for their castles. One of the downsides to sieges is that you lose XP you have to regain, you'd effectively be removing that loss for the defending side, since they can now XP without any risk at all.
LC, your propley only oppesed to this cause you clan will never see owning a castle...leave that group come join mine, I think your high enought aren't you 61+? En maybe not.
I think it's a fine idea, they should have more benifets for castle holders, specailly for the Allys!!
The only thing castles are good for is SoE to when red, and the manners... And since no one uses heine area innadrill is low on popalation. Hell gludio has more poeple in it at any one point then heine does. (about 5 people in gludio, mostly delvling on gaurds)
I can say what I do, cause I've been in 2 clans that have owned innadrill (mine cerently does now) and in one that has owned gludio.
Haveing benifets for your ally is worth it, LC declians this, cause on our server, most of the castles are controled by one Ally.(that is unless LC rerolled to hindmith)
Being part of an alliance that does currently control Innadril, I'm actually opposed to this idea. Setting up a castle-only "dungeon" seems, to me, to be very similar to setting up instanced hunting areas.
I've never been a big fan of them, given that I enjoy the paranoia that comes with hunting in an open area. Do I concentrate 100% on healing my party, or do I give 5% of my attention to keeping my eyes on the doors to the catacomb room we're in, in the event of a massive train coming through?
It's a delicate balance that keeps me on my toes, and I love the rush that comes from it, even if nothing ever happens. I may suck at PVP, but I'm really good at being paranoid.
I do like the idea of siege bosses showing up to cause the defenders some grief, but I'd also like to see siege bosses showing up to annoy the attackers as well. Or, better yet: a siege boss that's there for everyone. Attacker, defender, it doesn't matter. It's still going to try to eat you for lunch.
Maybe a siege boss that you can subdue and get to fight for your side? :shrug:
If they took castles out of the game, I'd simply shrug and move on with my game. The castle is not crucial to my enjoyment.
I agree that a castle should have a dungeon, yes (I need somewhere to practice my sadistic hobbies), but I don't think it should be limited to castle owners only.
A castle is what you make it. Innadril is actually fairly decent for us, and currently stands as the only neutral castle on all of Lionna. That in and of itself is a bonus.
They tried to do exactly this with the Dawn/Dusk system. For a week out of every two weeks, castle or non-castle players exclusively SHOULD have the rights to catacombs. But these days most severs have let the system die. They need to remove the "buying into Dawn" element from the game for players higher than 39. Let the noobies still get in the cats, let alts in for taking care of "business," and give exclusive crystal lvling/raids/hunting rights in these areas to the members of the winning side.
I do agree, castles are only worth the manor/taxes (Giran pulls in a ton on Hindemith). But they tried to implement a system with NA players immediately zerged to one side or another o.o
They tried to do exactly this with the Dawn/Dusk system. For a week out of every two weeks, castle or non-castle players exclusively SHOULD have the rights to catacombs. But these days most severs have let the system die. They need to remove the "buying into Dawn" element from the game for players higher than 39. Let the noobies still get in the cats, let alts in for taking care of "business," and give exclusive crystal lvling/raids/hunting rights in these areas to the members of the winning side.
I do agree, castles are only worth the manor/taxes (Giran pulls in a ton on Hindemith). But they tried to implement a system with NA players immediately zerged to one side or another o.o
If you think that behavior was exclusive to the NA servers, you're sadly mistaken. Only difference is they zerged to dusk, because you don't have to buy in. Castle owners just leave the castle pledge out of the alliance during signup week, and re-add it after so they can defend it.
LC, your propley only oppesed to this cause you clan will never see owning a castle
Actually our clan/alliance held Giran for a long time, I would be opposed to the system even there. I don't think its good to have exclusive dungeons, while alliances can already do this (like SP does that), they *do* have to risk some contesting or even just people reporting them. In a private dungeon there would be no such risks.
I think your high enought aren't you 61+? En maybe not.
I am quite a bit higher than that.
As for castle benefits, you also forgot the dawn buy-ins, ontop of the manor and taxes, which all amounts up to alot of money. But of course if a castle doesn't give enough and people are not satisified with them, feel free to pass on the castle to me, lol.
But yes, some benefits could be given to the castlelords, specifically they really should have the same and more benefits as a clanhall has, now that I would say would be fair.
Raid bosses associated with each castle is a neat idea but here's my version. The raid boss is in a special chamber that opens only at certain times of the day. At those times the doors open and the "lair" becomes a combat zone similar to sieges. If the castle holders do more damage to the boss then the boss fights for them during the siege. But if the other faction does more damage then it fights against the castle lord. Now castle lords can't just go own a castle and sit on it but will actually have to keep defending. This will also give attackers an incentive to keep fighting. The damage is the cumulative damage done during the 2 week period. Of course when the castle boss dies then it pops like a raid boss.
imo while not necissarily a bad idea, it makes safe leveling. What about the larger alliances that can dominate castle seiges simply because of large #'s but can't hold their own in same numbers fights? I really am against any kind of instanced xp for any reason, just doesn't go with the flavor of the game (being out there risking getting attacked while trying to level up, flavor).
They get decent money from taxes, and tons of good items from the manor. And money means alot in this game. No need to throw the castle give them near 100% safe ways to level up.
Wouldn't be apposed to castles giving ports to nice xp spots, giving buffs for the whole alliance. Like an alliance clan hall or something. But a definite NO to anything involving instances.
I dont like the dungeon idea. You shouldnt get free exp without the chance of people coming to kill you no matter what. I know we have the dimensional rifts, which some clans only lvl there now so they cant die to people. If you own a castle, you are right in the middle of the politics of the server and kill people and people kill you. Just cause you own it, doesnt mean you should lvl in piece for 2 weeks.
I do however like the raid boss idea that was mentioned. As I said before in the other thread, clans that are registered to defend, should be put on a raid boss list. I said that when the raid boss spawns, only people from those clans on the defending caslte list can kill the raid boss in the first hour. After a hour, it is free for all people.
This will slow down the raid farmer problem by 90%. They wont be the ones selling items for amounts that only people who buy adena with real money can afford. If you are a solid clan and can do raid bosses, why should you be forking over 500m+ for S weapons? Very few legit players can do this.
If NCsoft tied the raid bosses into the caslte system somehow, lots of them would be gone.
Edit: this would also be a first step to the rumored territory wars in further chronicles.
I dont like the dungeon idea. You shouldnt get free exp without the chance of people coming to kill you no matter what. I know we have the dimensional rifts, which some clans only lvl there now so they cant die to people. If you own a castle, you are right in the middle of the politics of the server and kill people and people kill you. Just cause you own it, doesnt mean you should lvl in piece for 2 weeks.
I do however like the raid boss idea that was mentioned. As I said before in the other thread, clans that are registered to defend, should be put on a raid boss list. I said that when the raid boss spawns, only people from those clans on the defending caslte list can kill the raid boss in the first hour. After a hour, it is free for all people.
This will slow down the raid farmer problem by 90%. They wont be the ones selling items for amounts that only people who buy adena with real money can afford. If you are a solid clan and can do raid bosses, why should you be forking over 500m+ for S weapons? Very few legit players can do this.
If NCsoft tied the raid bosses into the caslte system somehow, lots of them would be gone.
Edit: this would also be a first step to the rumored territory wars in further chronicles.
what about alliances that contain RB farmer clans, AND hold castles? Hey, lets give them a blank check.
If you think that behavior was exclusive to the NA servers, you're sadly mistaken. Only difference is they zerged to dusk, because you don't have to buy in. Castle owners just leave the castle pledge out of the alliance during signup week, and re-add it after so they can defend it.
That's a result of server population and carebear Korea. If your population is huge, the castle holders are a minority. If your population is...North America...your server is largely castle holders at significant levels. It should be hard for Dawn to win but they should have money to pimp it out. However, I do agree a castle dungeon would be tight. My point is merely, they tried once already :p
I dont like the dungeon idea. You shouldnt get free exp without the chance of people coming to kill you no matter what. I know we have the dimensional rifts, which some clans only lvl there now so they cant die to people. If you own a castle, you are right in the middle of the politics of the server and kill people and people kill you. Just cause you own it, doesnt mean you should lvl in piece for 2 weeks.
I do however like the raid boss idea that was mentioned. As I said before in the other thread, clans that are registered to defend, should be put on a raid boss list. I said that when the raid boss spawns, only people from those clans on the defending caslte list can kill the raid boss in the first hour. After a hour, it is free for all people.
This will slow down the raid farmer problem by 90%. They wont be the ones selling items for amounts that only people who buy adena with real money can afford. If you are a solid clan and can do raid bosses, why should you be forking over 500m+ for S weapons? Very few legit players can do this.
If NCsoft tied the raid bosses into the caslte system somehow, lots of them would be gone.
Edit: this would also be a first step to the rumored territory wars in further chronicles.
what about alliances that contain RB farmer clans, AND hold castles? Hey, lets give them a blank check.
and the difference in that to what is it now would be? They already have blank checks and are doing what they want with them.
I dont like the dungeon idea. You shouldnt get free exp without the chance of people coming to kill you no matter what. I know we have the dimensional rifts, which some clans only lvl there now so they cant die to people. If you own a castle, you are right in the middle of the politics of the server and kill people and people kill you. Just cause you own it, doesnt mean you should lvl in piece for 2 weeks.
I do however like the raid boss idea that was mentioned. As I said before in the other thread, clans that are registered to defend, should be put on a raid boss list. I said that when the raid boss spawns, only people from those clans on the defending caslte list can kill the raid boss in the first hour. After a hour, it is free for all people.
This will slow down the raid farmer problem by 90%. They wont be the ones selling items for amounts that only people who buy adena with real money can afford. If you are a solid clan and can do raid bosses, why should you be forking over 500m+ for S weapons? Very few legit players can do this.
If NCsoft tied the raid bosses into the caslte system somehow, lots of them would be gone.
Edit: this would also be a first step to the rumored territory wars in further chronicles.
what about alliances that contain RB farmer clans, AND hold castles? Hey, lets give them a blank check.
and the difference in that to what is it now would be? They already have blank checks and are doing what they want with them.
It is just the most simple technical implementation of the general idea of this thread (all others are basically the same stuff put in more vague terms). BTW, I don't think it will affect the degree of the unnamed problem ever futher.
Thank you Krissa... that is exactly what I was trying to do :D
Ok, so if there are issues with having a dungeon that only a castle holder can access then maybe not fill it with mobs but fill it with the one Boss who then respawns on a long timer. Along the way you have to solve puzzels or whatever to get to him (or her :p ).
Otherwise what you are getting is a Boss that when you attack it you get "attack fails because of unsuitable terms".
I mean, what the heck is that.
The problem is that you guys and gals are smart, I'll give you that, but you are sometimes too literal.
As far as castle holders having too many perks... I don't know... the perks aren't all that. If I was a clan leader again I wouldn't want to hold a castle because why in the world would I want to run a manor system, maybe make a few mistakes, and have the player base [censored] and moan because they can't get their "fluffy Codrans"
And if the game is about pvp and sieging castles then they really should be something that is sought after. Maybe for more than one reason.
In any case, you can't just have a boss mob that is standing their out in the open and not have everyone be able to attack it becuase there needs to be a reason.
Or... maybe have the castle owners do a quest where they get a special arrow that if they shoot it when the boss is down to 1/10th it's hitpoints then the uber regen stops and it can actually be killed. Otherwise the uber regen starts and the group can't kill it.
In other words, there must be some sort of logic to the system. But it has to take place within some sort of story context. Otherwise the logic is "the code is written that way". How dry is that? :)
It is just the most simple technical implementation of the general idea of this thread (all others are basically the same stuff put in more vague terms). BTW, I don't think it will affect the degree of the unnamed problem ever futher.
Thank you Krissa... that is exactly what I was trying to do :D
Ok, so if there are issues with having a dungeon that only a castle holder can access then maybe not fill it with mobs but fill it with the one Boss who then respawns on a long timer. Along the way you have to solve puzzels or whatever to get to him (or her :p ).
Otherwise what you are getting is a Boss that when you attack it you get "attack fails because of unsuitable terms".
I mean, what the heck is that.
The problem is that you guys and gals are smart, I'll give you that, but you are sometimes too literal.
As far as castle holders having too many perks... I don't know... the perks aren't all that. If I was a clan leader again I wouldn't want to hold a castle because why in the world would I want to run a manor system, maybe make a few mistakes, and have the player base [censored] and moan because they can't get their "fluffy Codrans"
And if the game is about pvp and sieging castles then they really should be something that is sought after. Maybe for more than one reason.
In any case, you can't just have a boss mob that is standing their out in the open and not have everyone be able to attack it becuase there needs to be a reason.
Or... maybe have the castle owners do a quest where they get a special arrow that if they shoot it when the boss is down to 1/10th it's hitpoints then the uber regen stops and it can actually be killed. Otherwise the uber regen starts and the group can't kill it.
In other words, there must be some sort of logic to the system. But it has to take place within some sort of story context. Otherwise the logic is "the code is written that way". How dry is that? :)
Just forget about bosses and/or Safe xp for castle owers. Be better to just make it like an alliance clan hall, better buffs than regular clan halls, great xp port spots, and fix the manor to be more efficient. The manor items+taxes are already easy enough to get rolling in money from. Hell on my server I can get dual craft stamps froma a castle lord I know for 8 times less than their market value( assuming the castle lord actually did sell them to me at base cost, I doubt it, who doesn't try for profit in L2?) Thats decent profit there.
IMO Raid Bosses are there for Everyone to use to gear themselves up. Castles are there for the alliance to make money to gear itself up.
And anykind of safe xp is just not right for this game.
if they made sieges like it was on the lineage 2 box you know, with actual siege tools, such as catapults, ladders you could use to get onto the castle walls, make it feel more like a castle siege now maybe since their will be more tools to peoples disposal, could increase siege time by an hour or so such tools that could be added.
Trebuchet (not sure if that spelling is correct, for those who want an easier term, its a catapult.)
make the time of day night time and make all archers arrows go on FIRE! make the skys look awesome, imagine having all those archers on the wall have flaming arrows.
Ladders, have ladders thrown onto the castle walls and have people climb up them, to use the ladder just double click it *as if you were gonna talk to an npc* and itll make your guy slide up the ladder!
buyable siege striders
the idea for the striders is you pay a base fee for you to have access to a siege strider to help take down the front door, or attack enemy players the strider will not be able to leave the siege zone and the strider will look armored and equipped with spikes compared to the plain traveling strider.
In an old siege video I saw Dark elf's summoning huge ogres? in a siege and the ogres fought for them, implement this idea! SIEGE OGRES!!! when I siege I want total chaos like someone is actually taking your castle, not just 2 alliances waiting for the first shots to take place then a bit of "ranged" battle and by ranged I mean a bunch of necro's shooting back and forth at eachother.
I would be happy if they made the castles more useful for the non clan leaders...
Other then a place to soe back to to save on teleport fees.. I dont see much from the castle. Sure it makes money for the clan but to the avg member it dosent give buffs like a clan hall. Its not usable by the entire alliance. It gives no teleport options..
Honestly its rather useless compared to a clan hall for the regular members.