[Implementation Feedback] RvR design

[dur3al]

1) How is it easier to break funnels in the last RvR system? Cannons have an ammo limit. At worst, you have cannons and they don't.

You forget that while cannons are shooting each other, with every passing minute that the attacking force is sitting in front of enemy keep, they're adding to their chance of failure due:
1) Premades farming their randoms and followers by postern;
2) Reinforcements arriving to defend;
3) Premades ganking from posterns stopping reinforcements of the offensive side to arrive;
4) Offensive's side randoms and even guildies from groups being picked off by rdps from the walls;

Most keep have 2 posterns, one that is sort-of in direction to the faction's warcamp, and another in the opposite side, so as soon as the main "attacking force" arrives at the front door and starts shooting their cannons, groups from the defensive side will leave from posterns and stop any reinforcements from the attacking side to reinforce the main attacking force, unless in big zones with wide areas, such as CW, but in zones like KV this is obvious. So every time the attack is delayed, the probability of failing the attack increases, having extra cannons or not.

Also, there is quite a lot of feedback around showing that the defending side can much more effectively deploy and kill the offensive's side cannons I believe.

2) Morale dumping is a shining example of something that cuts both ways. Can a few people do it? Yes. Can a zerg do it right back to you and do it a lot better than you can? Oh dear me, yes. I'm pretty sure I remember all the fun of the fair in T2 and T3 with two of the bigger guilds at that time, when it was demonstrated that if you have bomb warbands, you are still going to get blown to **** by a bigger group of bomb warbands using the same morale dump tactics that you are. That bombing works just as well for annihilating smaller opposition, which is a persistent complaint about cannons.

That is not entirely true. In order for full bombing warbands to fight big numbers, they require not only to moral bomb, but also to go heavy AoE specced for full effectiveness when morals are in cooldown, and just to hit as many people as possible in general. This creates a natural counter that smaller groups can exploit, which is spreading out.
Back in live we've managed many times to outplay larger guild groups of 12 and even 24 players with our 6 players by the simple fact that we kited and spread ourselfs effectively enough for all their AoE damage (and their moral bomb) to not be enough to kill any of us, and in case they did kill one, it was 1 out of 6 and we could even get a ress if we played properly enough.

Example:


In this fight we've meet this 12 man warband alone in Eataine who came out to try and kill our 6 man while bomb specced if I'm not mistaken. No adds at all to change the kill score, all of those 44 kills were from the same guild group.

There was another instance of us meeting a warband of Soul Reapers back in the day with Draggan as main assist and I was on my WP, where we managed to out-moral bomb them by simply kiting when they massed up for a moral dump and we either drained when it was possible (with offensive gear) or kited around, picking them apart by ST focus, and finally when SL got his M4 we all used our offensive morals to get a lot of kills at the same time finally managing to wipe them all.

Of course in order to make this viable we would need things such as Quick Escape, and also Trivial Blows to lower how quickly someone dies to damage etc, things we had at live and not here, but still serves as an example.

It's amazing how people think morale bombing is anything other than a slight step up from miscalibrated cannons.

Exactly, it goes both ways of course, but at least you're using your class skills and there is natural counters such as moral drain (perhaps they could be buffed?), and back in live there were also AoE moral drains from offensive sets (for mdps if I'm not mistaken), such as sovereign, which were quite handy adding a whole level in moral bombing, since there was play and counter-play with instant moral drains effectively negating guaranteed moral bombs.

If you've 200 people stacked in a funnel, one suicidal guy with moral drain would effectively **** them all up, while you could send 2 waves to push the funnel, with the first one being most likely drained, but the second most likely wouldn't.. there are many plays, but requires guild level organization and good leading players, which is hard to come by when there is hardly any point for being competitive and frankly, no incentive either.... and thus currently oRvR is mostly led by pugs and casual players... its obvious they'll find it really hard to break any funnel or do anything which requires organization really, unless overwhelming their opponent by massive population unbalance.

So, no, I won't be removing cannons. They are there to ruin massive engagements outright.

I'm not sure about this, but isn't "massive engagements" what made this oRvR game great? I've never been such a hard fan of warband fights since I prefer to spend time doing scenarios or ganking, but isn't this what everyone who enjoys playing warband-size guilds love the most about this game? I'm not sure what is trying to be accomplished here then... massive fights will always happen, why would you try ruin them?

Even though many people may disagree with my next statement, and I believe that the server's decision making people are included... oRvR is not casual or pug friendly, and it shouldn't be made to be.

It never was, and never meant to.. Simply look around, gather the data from oRvR to see what I mean.
You can always see that the higher player kills in the zone are always from people in guild premades or warbands, all the big moments that happen in oRvR are decided by how effective these groups are, be it in lord fight, be it in funnel break, be it in effectively killing people to push the other side from an objective.

Just try to go in solo or pugging in oRvR, without healers or tanks.. and see how long you'll survive, unless in a solo class (to farm renown from solo kills only, but not contributing to the realm), and how much you're contributing to the overall success of your realm. It won't be pretty, that is why:

The only way you find to contribute to your faction while in a non organized group, is by zerging.

As I explained sometime ago, its the only way you can be effective with your class while pugging/solo. This creates the whole problem you're trying to fix. If everyone played in groups or premades, they wouldn't really zerg simply because a) its not fun and b) its not effective rr gain wise; and they wouldn't need zerg unless for decisive moments where zerging is basically required (such as attacking a keep).

This is a problem because you have the general mind of punishing zerging, but you shouldn't punish it in moments when its the only thing they can/have to do.

In the end you can't strike a good balance (and a fun WAR oRvR system) if you try to "even out the odds" mechanic-wise with clutches for people who refuse to play in organized groups and in a non-pug way.

Even historically you can link every single successful guild in GW2's open oRvR to WAR's because of that, especially Karak-Norn: Red Guard, VII, Moonlapse, Kill Frenzy, Tainted, Pax Mortis, Explicit Content, Vengence of the Fallen (Karak Azgal), and many many others whom I forget.
That is because WAR oRvR was very group oriented and guild oriented requiring some level of organization and "premading" to succeed... if you didn't do that, you'd accomplish nothing but being meat-shield and people to be farmed by the enemy premades.

[lastalien]

So, no, I won't be removing cannons. They are there to ruin massive engagements outright.

I represent one of the largest guild on the server, our Alliance is an association of the largest organized guilds on the server. And together we have a direct and effective influence on the situation in the RVR

In the context of the guns, I want to ask to limit their effect, that is, the ability to shoot only the area of ​​the keeps on both sides. Because of their use in oRVR upsets the balance.

It makes sense to limit the number of guns on. In fact, the castle at the moment you can only take significantly more players. When equal amounts, it is not feasible. Because defenders receive a large boost damage at one point, by guns, which can not be compensated by anything the attacker, as they are forced to be substituted under the blows.

Maybe it makes sense to do damage from the guns do not crossing, like a rain of fire, but there is a problem that the damage available immediately. Perhaps it makes sense to do damage by guns split, divide the existing damage to instant and a second portion continuing to do.

[Buran]

2dur3al:

oRvR is not casual or pug friendly, and it shouldn't be.

I would like to say that oRvR is not friendly for all of us, by different reasons for groups. One of the way make more wins is combine more groups and WBs together. Another way is train hard for the effective game in groups. The difference in the sets is not so much that would solve. And i like Warhammer for this!!!

[Vandoles]

I couldn't find it in the thread to quote, but I cannot believe someone is elitist enough to say orvr shouldn't be friendly to casuals and pugs. What should the game be then, 6-man perfect comp groups with cookie cutter specc fighting each other in an endless stalemate? No more new players, the population slowly declining until the game is dead in a year?

Let me tell you, I lead order pug WBs almost daily and action begins when I gather casuals and pugs. Big warbands initiate action about twice per week.

I don't think anyone buys the idea of a hardcore game only for those willing to spend all their time, use voice chat consistently and work up strategies for minmaxing. Especially when there's no issue at all with the game being geared towards hardcore players winning, but allowing casuals and pugs to participate. I just fear what's going to happen when you can express that opinion where the deva read it, while the thousands of casuals who are your new players and those that fill the zones cannot reply.

That said, Id like to ask if we can still talk about timers? The 2 minute timer with low as to cap BOs makes it impossible to defend them, so it prevents fights in the lake. Very few skirmishes and engagements happen because of this. The thing is, 2 minutes are enough in Caledor, but not anywhere else. My point being, can it not scale with the amount of people in the zone? When it's a zerg vs a small amount of people, ok. 2 minutes is fine. But when it's several zergs vs a few less zergs, it just prevents fights.

[Morf]

I believe removing the need to own all bo's to lock a zone is missed badly, it gave the outnumbered side a chance to fight back after the keep has been lost, a one last battle where you dont have to run the gauntlet of facing the zerg and dying while trying to get into your keep and a chance for the losing side to put up enough of a fight to stall the realm with both keeps for some time.
This also gave more emphasis on teamwork and coordinating between your realm and meant if you were playing on the zerg side you had to split up in order to hold the bo's should the outnumbered side coordinate themselves to capture multiple bo's.

[Vandoles]

Just would like to mention - t2 and t3 badly need the old system back. This is far more major than you think. People are powerleveling now, due to the dead t2/t3 rvr lakes, resulting in overpopulation of t4. A lot of people are coming in t4 with ruin and greens, which perpetuates the zerg you so hate. If it is at all possible to reverse the system or make ram spawnable at r0 keep with 3 bos or some such, you'd see a lot more spread and t4 being made up of more experienced, organized people.

[Azarael]

The presence of players in T4 is exactly what I want. Zerg is not an inevitability, and will be solved for what it is.

[Vandoles]

It's not exactly the fact that the people are all there, but that they're all powerleveling to it. So they end up in t4 with low gear/skill. Which excludes group/organized play, which you're aiming for and perpetuates zerging and disorganized rvr, afking at keeps, xrealming, afking at the WC and only attacking with far superior numbers, because you can never take out the defense with a lot of r32s with renown greens, at best.

t2 and t3 are where players learn rvr and their class. I think it has its purpose.

[Collateral]

I completely agree with Vandoles. I see too many lvl 38-40 players that are not in a guild who have no idea how to play their class (sometimes even those in a guild). Too many times in pug scs have I been the top dd with my SNB tank, with sometimes more than double the dps damage (and yes, while switching guards and everything). And a big part of this is exactly what Vandoles mentioned. New players spend way too little time in t2 and t3, which are very important for learning the class, and learning how to be organized in RvR, as well as in SCs.

That's why you have these huge zergs, because it's pretty much the only thing these players know, and it's also the easiest thing to do. And following organized wbs won't get you very far either, because you will mostly be soaking up the damage from the enemy wb, learing very little of how to be effective as your class. And after a while they get bored from constantly getting destroyed by those organized wbs, they lose morale and eventually interest in the game.

I know that you have a crap ton of work Aza, you said it over and over (and I can't say how much i appreciate it), and that the focus is now on t4. But I just think that t2 and t3 shuold start getting some love soon. The RvR changes for t4 you make now may not even be viable when you start focusing on lower tiers, and all the work will be almost in vain (and no one wants that to happen).

I also agree with what dur3al said. I feel like WAR was meant to be played by organized guilds, and sometimes even zergs. That's the charm of oRvR in WAR, and it's almost one of a kind.

[Vandoles]

I just want to point out, what you said, about aza having a ton of work and focus being on t4 - that's why I said, if it were possible (I dunno coding, so I dunno if that's easier said than done) to just bring back the old system in t2 and t3. If it's as easy as it sounds, ok, if not my argument isn't valid, of course.