Type /register while in-game to register for a forums account.

[Alexfoolery]

Following up the “alliances ruin the server” suggestion, I would argue that alliances are not necessarily bad and something to be entirely removed from the game, but rather reworked.

The issue is the amount of towns that an alliance can have within it, currently being 12: this number was likely chosen arbitrarily in like 2015 and Loka has just been stuck with it since now. There is no reason for an alliance to have this many towns, and most of the time these slots do not even get filled entirely.

The other main problem is currently mercenary towns.
Merc towns were added during a time where it made sense for them to exist: it was 2024, and it was a period where a lot of people of influence got banned (Poland, Lucas, Alzxdnr, Lxthi, Qualifled etc.). With their ban, Loka lost a massive part of the community. Personally, I have a feeling that staff used merc towns as a solution to not let some continents die due to the sudden power void.

Now, two years have passed and this seemingly temporary solution appears to have become permanent. Merc towns have madew it so that fights with hundreds of players are possible. Sure, massive 400 player wars seem fun on paper, but I personally don’t find them fun for multiple reasons.

Why big alliances need to be capped and why merc towns need to be reworked

- Recruits aren’t taught to play and are just walking armor stands who simply come to fights and do not intend to play the server seriously.
- A lot of towns just join an alliance to AFK due to the amount of slots available. If a town isn’t going to be useful to an alliance, then they should not be in it.
- Big fights drastically affect the server performance.
- A fight with 400 players looks just as intense as a fight with 200, just with more lag.
- Balak loses its purpose. If I can get 12 towns to fight on a World capital’s home continent, then Balak, a region that was meant to be the home of larger fights, becomes obsolete.

My Solution:

- Alliances can be composed of a total of 8 towns (12 -> 8)
- There can only be 2 mercenary towns within an alliance (11 -> 2)

Consequences and benefits:

- Smaller fights (50v50 max) on most continents. Return of “regional” alliances like pre-2024
- Balak is used for its intended purpose of holding large fights. Continental capitals return to be meaningful.
- New players who attend fights are taught conquest and aren’t just a number. In smaller fights, each person matters, so town owners have to be more careful in teaching their recruits the basics

=> this brings to higher player retention and contributes to make people continue playing the server

 

[hitboxer1337]

Town limit in an alliance was decreased from infinite to 12 somewhere in 2022 fyi ^^

 

[Heatzzi]

Thats so real.

 

[shharpp]

+1 small 50v50s are way more fun that 250v250s

 

[Alexfoolery]

Town limit in an alliance was decreased from infinite to 12 somewhere in 2022 fyi ^^

im not unc sorry! but this further proves my point sir woohoo

 

[Burkje]

+1

 

[the_farter123]

- There can only be 2 mercenary towns within an alliance (11 -> 2)

In my opinion two mercenary towns just feel like too little though, I feel like it should be minimum 5 or something. Also alot of people made their towns before this would be a change so for example the ones who had chosen Kalros because they thought that mercenary towns would never be decreased would ultimately be effected and I don't think towns with massive builds like New Silverhand would like to move to Garama or Ascalon just because of mercenary towns getting a decrease in numbers.

 

[__Ske__]

im afraid that even if you limited the ammout of towns in alliances, you would still see massive numbers, cuz its usually just a few towns (3 or 4) warping 90% of any ally
like in HL in november you had asgard matrix silverhand and riverside warping 40-50 each, thats 150-200 ppl from just 4 towns
so these giant fights would happen anyways, the only thing that changes would be that smaller towns would never participate in them cuz alliances wouldnt be able to afford to squeeze them in :/
the only way to get 50v50 fights is to limit the number of ppl warping like on small army

 

[Alexfoolery]

In my opinion two mercenary towns just feel like too little though, I feel like it should be minimum 5 or something. Also alot of people made their towns before this would be a change so for example the ones who had chosen Kalros because they thought that mercenary towns would never be decreased would ultimately be effected and I don't think towns with massive builds like New Silverhand would like to move to Garama or Ascalon just because of mercenary towns getting a decrease in numbers.

Right now alliances meta is random outpost with tiles + 11 merc towns. Big towns from other continents can either make their own alliance or, if they warp a lot, join the one of a different continent. Small towns would still be able to play, just in worse alliances. Personally I view it like this:

-> alliance members limit is capped at 8 -> more alliances on continents -> more fights in every continent

This month on Ascalon was good because there were 3 alliances contesting. Now, imagine if those alliances were actually fair (with the 8 town cap) and not about whoever pays the most shitter merc towns on other continents.

 

[the_farter123]

Right now alliances meta is random outpost with tiles + 11 merc towns. Big towns from other continents can either make their own alliance or, if they warp a lot, join the one of a different continent. Small towns would still be able to play, just in worse alliances. Personally I view it like this:

-> alliance members limit is capped at 8 -> more alliances on continents -> more fights in every continent

This month on Ascalon was good because there were 3 alliances contesting. Now, imagine if those alliances were actually fair (with the 8 town cap) and not about whoever pays the most shitter merc towns on other continents.

I still don't see any of this responding to my "towns like New Silverhand with massive builds probably wouldn't like to enjoy to move to a new continent just because merc towns will get a decrease after you already had chosen a spot years ago to place their town."

 

[fa1c]

This month on Ascalon was good because there were 3 alliances contesting.

It was more so 2 and a gimmick alliance

 

[Alexfoolery]

I still don't see any of this responding to my "towns like New Silverhand with massive builds probably wouldn't like to enjoy to move to a new continent just because merc towns will get a decrease after you already had chosen a spot years ago to place their town."

they don’t have to move necessarily lol any alliance would accept them as a merc, most “good” towns have been here for years even before merc towns were a thing

 

[Alexfoolery]

It was more so 2 and a gimmick alliance

yeah cuz aol and adl had more towns, that’s why im pushing for smaller alliances so even gimmick alliances can have a higher chance

 

[lceSpiice]

Best thing read for the day +1

 

[Cryptite]

All of these and similar posts completely forget why we made the changes, and none of our numbers chosen were arbitrarily. I'll briefly revisit OP's points below (and may repeat what others have already said).

it was a period where a lot of people of influence got banned

Who was on the server and who was banned had nothing to do with why merc towns were added.

I have a feeling that staff used merc towns as a solution to not let some continents die due to the sudden power void

Not entirely wrong but a weird take on it. Everybody seems to have forgotten proxy towns, where people would own 3 towns and just leave empty husks of towns on all continents to be prepared for wherever the war moved. Loads of town owners didn't like having to leave their "real" towns to somebody else and just wanted to participate in the action. Realism sounds nicer than reality when it comes to what players will do to fight. Fun took precedence.

- Recruits aren’t taught to play and are just walking armor stands who simply come to fights and do not intend to play the server seriously.

As long as players are pinged to logon, given armor, told where to warp and what to click (and then no other thing about how Loka is or what it does), then this will never not be the case regardless of any way Conquest has ever been or will be. They're called recruits for a reason.

- Alliances can be composed of a total of 8 towns (12 -> 8)

What does this accomplish? Players can and will just glob into 4 towns if 4 was the cap.

- There can only be 2 mercenary towns within an alliance (11 -> 2)

This reintroduces proxy towns. At least now towns have more meaning and we've seen a lot more high quality towns on Loka ever since mercs was introduced.

- Smaller fights (50v50 max) on most continents. Return of “regional” alliances like pre-2024

This is naive and sees history with rose-colored glasses. Alliances weren't regional back then, they too moved between continents, just the names changed.

The only thing reducing town cap in Alliances would accomplish would be to reduce the total probable number of towns that simply exist on the server. The illusion that it will "generate" smaller overall groups of players to fight vs everybody matriculating down into The Two Big Alliances has never been true in 10 years of Conquest.

 

[ThePigGang]

A lot of towns just join an alliance to AFK due to the amount of slots available. If a town isn’t going to be useful to an alliance, then they should not be in it.

If you can admit that there are towns that currently do not contribute to their alliances, how can limiting the town cap to 8 fix anything?

I think you're forgetting what fuels these 400 player fights. Competition. Capping the number of towns will not stop the most dedicated people from having 200 actives in their town. We have seen 150+ active towns numerous times before, in an alliance of 12 towns.

 

[the_farter123]

All of these and similar posts completely forget why we made the changes, and none of our numbers chosen were arbitrarily. I'll briefly revisit OP's points below (and may repeat what others have already said).


Who was on the server and who was banned had nothing to do with why merc towns were added.

Not entirely wrong but a weird take on it. Everybody seems to have forgotten proxy towns, where people would own 3 towns and just leave empty husks of towns on all continents to be prepared for wherever the war moved. Loads of town owners didn't like having to leave their "real" towns to somebody else and just wanted to participate in the action. Realism sounds nicer than reality when it comes to what players will do to fight. Fun took precedence.

As long as players are pinged to logon, given armor, told where to warp and what to click (and then no other thing about how Loka is or what it does), then this will never not be the case regardless of any way Conquest has ever been or will be. They're called recruits for a reason.

What does this accomplish? Players can and will just glob into 4 towns if 4 was the cap.


This reintroduces proxy towns. At least now towns have more meaning and we've seen a lot more high quality towns on Loka ever since mercs was introduced.


This is naive and sees history with rose-colored glasses. Alliances weren't regional back then, they too moved between continents, just the names changed.

The only thing reducing town cap in Alliances would accomplish would be to reduce the total probable number of towns that simply exist on the server. The illusion that it will "generate" smaller overall groups of players to fight vs everybody matriculating down into The Two Big Alliances has never been true in 10 years of Conquest.

I agree with everything you've said

 

[coolkidsupa]

I think a better option would be to introduce continent locks for several months at a time, that way if you merc for an alliance then you're really forced to live and die bout that alliance on some loyalty shit

 

[Click1x]

Delete mercenaries

 

[flwh]

-1