Reduce the gap in rewards between winning and losing

[TreefAM]

but because other faction is overpopulated.

Oh please, its not rare for Order to outnumber destro in the lakes for a period of time, like yesterday when you got smashed in BC and Cale or this morning in CW.
But you guys keep insta logging after the first wipe.

[carlos]

but because other faction is overpopulated.

Oh please, its not rare for Order to outnumber destro in the lakes for a period of time, like yesterday when you got smashed in BC and Cale or this morning in CW.
But you guys keep insta logging after the first wipe.

This made my day

[Greywolfamakir]

This is clear when you look as some of the pug warbands where they have 1 healer and 1 tank. They are there to get the loser reward and have no ambition to win.

Those ain't warband pugs, but people who went as soloQ and got mashed together. Majority of them are 2h tanks, engineers, SWs, dps AMs as nobody want them in their warband. While I agree partialy it's player issue, we can see here two other issues: 1) scarcity of tanks on order side and healers to lesser degree, 2) lack of class balance on order side, destro has much more viable classes.

Due to both of those, you can much easier build PUGs on destro side, as you get much less "rejects".

This is a player issue not balance. If ppl chose classes to gank and 1v1 and join order as they have better 1v1 classes they should not expect to be given candy for showing up.

What if you choose when City Sieges didn't even exist?

RoR's staff took a decision, we are gonna add Sovereign, the best gear in the game, and it will be available just from 24 v 24 content, where a bunch of classes are not really good/desirable. They can ignore that fact or they can aliviate it to encourage to people play.

My suggestion just helps to people in disadvantage to gear up a bit faster and it reduces the amount of people that just leave the game when they calculate the amount of time that they will need to compete since they'll lose almost every City Siege.

[Nekkma]

I can understand your point on view, but you need remember, that Order overall has much lower playerbase, and if Destro won't be throwing, then Order will be nearly ALWAYS defending. Now, if you reduce rewards for defence two things will happen : 1) Order will be even more undergeared, 2) less people on Order will play cities and you will get even less instances for your overpopulated side.

I think we need different approach to rewarding for Campaign as a whole. Probably rewards reduced for City Sieges a lot, but with weekly rewards added like for solo Ranked, where you get amount of Conq/Vanq/Invaders/Royals (type based on your ToK unlocks) based on your total contribution to RvR campaign, so throwing, City logging and ignoring RvR won't be promoted or rewarded.

Also - about reducing gap between wining and losing : I don't think it's needed.

Yes, you are probably right. That’s why my first suggestion was to increase rewards for attackers. Still, I miss the days of realm pride when you defended to deny the other side loot and that was reward enough.

I like your idea. I too think that current reward structure need a substantial rework. One thing I would like to add is that winning a city should also be factored in the reward system. Back when we had stage 3 king instance, it was a realm wide goal to to win city. The best wb guilds actively sought to face other premade wbs to ensure victory. Atm, I get the feeling that some guilds try to avoid premade wbs to stomp pugs by queing late.

[Asherdoom]

Or, and I know this might be a shocking concept to some, just balance the classes.

[BurnSetting]

What gap are you talking about? ... The typical 1-2 royals difference between winning and losing a stage (before bags) is hardly a large gap, the opposite actually.

That's true! For that one instance of the city...
That's true! For a 1-3 star city...

If you take into account one player, or even a large chunk of a faction's players, having consecutive losses vs. a large chunk of the other faction's players having consecutive wins, then the difference becomes quite noticeable. Take for instance the losing of 5 cities in a row. I know I've been in 5 city losses in a row so it's not far fetched! Let's say the city star ratings were 5, 3, 2, 4, 5. Let's say I win one stage (the middle stage) in each city (Laughable!! And exciting to think about as well!). Not taking into account the randomness of bags, which the enemy side has just as much chance for so it cancels out anyway, I would be getting a total of 22 Royals for that work. If you were the winners in each of those cities you would get a total of 36 (without bags). A difference of 14. Spread that out to 20 cities, and you have 56 royals difference, which is enough for another big piece.

Getting completely stomped makes the difference even worse.

The difference in royals gained is obscene and highly skewed in Destro favor due to player skills, organization, and experience. Not to mention some class imbalances.

Going to a city and not getting lucky enough for a bag and thus getting only 3 royals is disheartening. And it's happened to me more than once. While I've been working my ass off as a healer to keep my team alive. Thankfully it is a rare occurrence and I usually get a bag or two, so I may end up with anywhere between 6 - 10 royals / city.

Give the Destro teams that same increase and you get them in Sov even faster. I mean, I wish I could get around 61 royals within the span of 5 city sieges...

[M0rw47h]

2h tank and dps AM are not classes. All 3 tank classes can spec to useful city roles (SM less desired out of the 3)

SM isn't less desirable for couple of reasons:

• Whispering Winds is MvP;
• group bubble;
• aoe frontal cone interrupt;
• aoe damage reduction on finisher (20%);
• aoe debuff which causes lots of healing;

AM can spec for healing/morale

Yes, they can. You still don't want more than one in WB, 2nd can be seen already as hinderance.
Myself I'm fan of two AMs as they can pump faster, insta rez each other, slow down meatgrinder with puddles etc - but it doesn't change fact, that once we finish building our organized warbands there are plenty of people of given class left out as not wanted. While AM is better than Shaman as utility class it's much worse healer and you want people taking healer spots to actualy heal, not pull tricks out of their sleeves.

ASWs are also very good in city.

Same as with AM, you mostly likely don't want more than one and it has to be already good geared to have any impact. You can't stack aSW like destro stacks mSH and profit. Sadly, once again many players are left alone and not wanted by 'us' (organized warbands).

I understand the frustration for people who play classes where nobody wants them regardless of what spec they went, but if people aren't willing to respec for an hour to a different role to get mad loot then **** them. Otherwise, I want to be able to go in on my 1050 intel Zealot (which does terrible damage btw, even with Divine Fury and Bloodlord for an extra 30%) and get easy loot.

People not willing to respec cause my blood to oil, but what can I do?

Spoiler:

Used to be Zealot main.

And going by those graphs of order classes seen, order are not lacking for healers. There's a WP army outthere somewhere.

Thats great, but we don't want to bring mix of WPs and AMs. We want WPs combined with RPs and usualy one AM - our healer population doesn't help us building healthy warbands. While this may not be issue for organized guilds, as we often switch between characters to get better warband composition, it's awful for PUGs you're facing.

The main difference is destro dps in general are doing easy AOE which can put out a lot of pressure but can struggle to secure kills quickly. Order MDPS like the WL, ASW and WH need to be running an assist train (the Slayers can join in too) and when it's done properly it tears a massive hole in the destro backlines which can be very difficult to recover from. Order have to try harder but when they do they can get far more kills in cities.

Yet, you don't want to overstack aSW, WHs and pugs have too many of those due to bad class balance as they ain't usualy wanted for organized WBs with higher quantities than one per WB. The only mDPS order can stack is SL and WL, when destro can stack Choppy boys, mSH and Maras - it makes HUGE difference. WH and WE share same problems.

Oh please, its not rare for Order to outnumber destro in the lakes for a period of time, like yesterday when you got smashed in BC and Cale or this morning in CW.
But you guys keep insta logging after the first wipe.

Order outnumbers Destro only at odd hours or when destro wants to get pushed. It sad, but thats how it lately is.

I like your idea. I too think that current reward structure need a substantial rework. One thing I would like to add is that winning a city should also be factored in the reward system. Back when we had stage 3 king instance, it was a realm wide goal to to win city. The best wb guilds actively sought to face other premade wbs to ensure victory.

I agree, if we will ever get something like weekly contribution rewards, winning a City should matter.
I also hope, someday City stars will affect gameplay, not just City Siege rewards.

Atm, I get the feeling that some guilds try to avoid premade wbs to stomp pugs by queing late.

People try to get as much rewards as possible, due to how hard is to get City Siege lately in reasonable hours. Its known Destruction has to instantly que to get into City Siege, so Order can try to 'choose' their opponents. However, you need to keep in mind, it's not as easy to build multiple balanced premade warbands on side, which is lacking players - it takes time, often we que 10 minutes before end of signups, because we we're looking for people or waiting for people who really can't be replaced.

[Nekkma]

The percentages difference stays the same regardless of how many or few cities you count.

I wrote typically, as the cities i participated in seem to avarage at 3 stars. And do not come crying about how unfair everything is to order as I proposed to give attackers invreased rewards as first option. I see 9 IC defs for each Altdorf so this would actually reward order more than destro (atm).

[carlos]

The percentages difference stays the same regardless of how many or few cities you count.

I wrote typically, as the cities i participated in seem to avarage at 3 stars. And do not come crying about how unfair everything is to order as I proposed to give attackers invreased rewards as first option. I see 9 IC defs for each Altdorf so this would actually reward order more than destro (atm).

What you're actually seeing is destro mains pushing IC with their alts.

City happens when destros who don't need invaders want royals and it doesn't happen when destro who wants invaders prefer to def end zones atm

[Kaelang]

Instead of finding ways to reduce the rewards for winners, have you tried organising some more competitive WB's to increase your chances of winning?

We shouldn't be encouraging losing, look what happened when RvR Invader rewards got changed for the end-zone. The gap is big enough to encourage winning cities, whilst also giving the losers something for participating.

If we start giving hand-outs and/or reducing rewards for people who are putting the effort in to win - what's the point of doing anything?

The gap isn't ridiculous - losers still get something. Winners get more.

Focus on winning, not trying to change the system to accommodate losing.

Also

that why i suggest that the amount of City's stars should affect the amount of Royal Crests whether you win or lose.

Am I mistaken in thinking that this is already in place?