Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Even big alliances were removed, there would then be the really good guilds, who would just again clap the cheeks of other guilds. This would then probably result in another post saying "only half a guild can pvp!"
So no matter what kind of restrictions/limits are put in place, there will always be people who are on top and many many many others who are on the bottom.
think bro... think.
Rather than 500 of the most active players in two alliance, it will split them up into 7 competitive guilds which is WAY BETTER. Or, 114 guild member cap would = 4 guilds.
And yea, make it so boon/rift stay at 70 v 70 to give that buffer for people who have lives or are just unlucky to work on that day. That will make each guild 100% PVX
And yea siege, may the best win not the one with beefest Zerg