Quote Originally Posted by Ualaa View Post
I'd think, each time you lose the battle (and every attacking side has lost at least once) the sides should be skewed by +/- 5 players or so. So that in each subsequent losing battle, the attackers get a slight (but cummulative) edge.
I always saw this as a better option for WG, and I can see it as a good option for TB. Add +5 slots to the losing side for the next battle, after a minimum of XX players join for each side. In other words, if you lose, the next time you get +5 player slots so that you can have a 5-player advantage, but only after ten or fifteen players have joined. That keeps it from being seven versus two or something equally silly. If you lose with a +5 advantage, then it's +10 the next time, and +15 the time after that. Then it resets, because if you can't win with +15 players then frankly, you really don't deserve it.

I would really rather that they simplify these "open-zone" PVP events, though. Why not just make it a resource race? Three towers, each faction begins at opposite ends of the map. You have XX resources that are depleted via player deaths. For each tower you hold, the opposite faction loses one additional resource per kill. The event is over when one side reaches zero or 30 minutes are up. If the game is tied after 30 minutes, winner is the faction that got the final kill. Your goals are entirely defined by killing the other players and avoiding death. Your secondary goal simply makes the killing more profitable. Holding the control points is only useful if you kill other players. The win condition makes it imperative that you go fucking berserk if the timer is running out on a close game.

It's PVP. Let the players do just that.