|
Dark Priest | Sun 15-Mar-09 11:29 PM |
Member since 19th Dec 2003
205 posts
| |
|
#24071, "RE: Less players, make less cabals?"
In response to Reply #0
|
I think we are cool as is and to be honest I would maybe add one or two more. Or at least a couple cabal-like religions.
I think that people, in general, like variety in choice. I am always turned off by having a limited choice. If people want interactions and tons of fellow cabal members, they will find them.
|
|
|
|
|
wareagle | Fri 13-Mar-09 10:26 PM |
Member since 19th Aug 2007
201 posts
| |
|
#24060, "RE: Less players, make less cabals?"
In response to Reply #0
|
I'll take some hits because I don't play regularly.
But from an outside perspective, Empire/Scion separated well. Empire with all four Sects in the old age was fun, but the move away from it caused some dynamics that cause a challenge to Empire.
Let's face it, the way the Russians are, give access to all classes in Empire(not just Russians but any 3 ppl that decide they want to perma) will be unstoppable.
I don't think truncating the cabals is as much of a gain as the fun factor that may or may not come with it. You may see some pendulum drops that make you very quickly re-visit the entire proposal.
I think a more effective solution was to actually give each cabal attainable goals.
Playing Empire? Maybe you can actually annex Balator. I tried this, and I have no idea how impossible it is to code, but something that can actually spread your influence.
Scion? Maybe you can actually bring about mobs that are badass, rewards abound for the team of Fortress and/or Outlander that defeat it.
Village/Nexus? I think the Veil may have served the purpose. If not, make the Veil a much more important issue.
Etc. I'm sure others can think of much better ideas, but main point is make each cabal actually be able to progress a goal inherent to the cabal.
*Wonder if at some point I spelled cabal "cable".
|
|
|
|
|