Battleobjectives during zonelocks

[Elymas]

As I said in my original post here, if the fear from the devs is that this will lead to too strong one-way entry point funnel spots. Then I am sure more can be done to avoid this.
- Add a portal to open a backdoor to apply a 2nd entrypoint.
- Move the flag outside of the too defendable BOs.

I like your ideas, but I still contradict you on this matter of too strong BOs. Fear is a subjective emotion, e.g. some may be afraid of spiders while others may not. We should not make changes within the game out of fear, but on the basis of reason and evidence from gameplay. While I completely understand what the worry is here, I don't share the same concern. My argument against moving any flags or creating artificial double entries is simple: we want these BOs to be easily defendable, so that smaller groups can hold on to them, delaying the attackers while other small groups try to counterattack by flipping other BOs. Only if there was a serious mechanical problem/exploit with the structure of these BOs should we start considering solutions, such as the flag transfer you proposed.

[wonshot]

No, you had your chance to stop the opposing force at the outer door, inner door, and lord.

that is a good arguement, thanks for bringing it up.
But that scenario is involving a situation where both realms most times have all their forces in one place, at the keep.
The advantage here is for who can use their numbers the best, a very very valid skill in War and besieging a keep.

but should numbers and use of numbers be the only wincondition. My proposal offers an alternative, and keep in mind its not a forced option. It simply just offers the underdogs in an outnumbered situation a chance to fight somewhat more even numbers (promoting not logging over to the winning and dominating orvr realm at the current moment)

So a more concrete situation example:
Destro have FMJ event night, they are locking zones with say 120 destro players in Praag.
Order have 80 players in the zone, they tried to hold the keep but got pushed out because they were outnumbered and had fewer organized warbands and groups.

Yes Destro had more numbers, and more organized players. I think they should win.
But if the underdogs are not having any chance for fighting when severly outnumbered, what will keep them from all just logging out or logging on destro toons.
And that is what my proposal is about, to promote fighting but still not changing the win-condition of largescale warfare.

So in my example the keep has fallen in praag, in the current system the BOs will get flagged red for destro probably within 3minuts and this is barely enough time for any order group to try and get an other attempt going for the zone (this is where some think the zone is already over and should be over)
In my proposal order could all run to Graveyard BO and setup with their 80 players. It will take destro some time to move a big enough force from the Captured keep to GY and wipe order and kill them. By the time they have moved enough forces to GY it might expose Armory BO to be attackable by an order 6man roaming, if they find a handful of pugs or an other smaller group to fight. Maybe the underdogs will get wiped and the zone locks, maybe they will stall for some time before the outnumbering realm have spread their troops out and hold all 4/4 BOs.
But the zone will still eventually lock for whoever took the keep, because of how impossible it is to lock when you have lost your keeplord and the keep is a ruin.

But the end result is that the entire zone is active, every BO matter equally much and people are pvping, coordination is rewarded wether its realmwide or withing your groups/warbands/guilds. And no matter your groupsieze you can potentially help your realm, find fights everywhere and the game is not just about bags & gear for a brief moment

[zulnam]

I am always a fan of expanding the rvr beyond the few hot zones every region has, but i doubt this change will have the effect you think it will.

There is little incentive for many on a losing side to keep going and do a one last stand is pretty small. Many will see this as an extra few minutes of waiting time before they get their bags for defending. In fairness, it's just a game.

But this encompasses a larger issue at hand, which is the linearity of the WAR campaign. If you've played this game for a few months you've pretty much seen it all. We've been playing it for yeas, decades some. There are few zones, they all have the same rulesets, they always unlock in the same order. It's not really the sprawling open world realms of Albion or even the ancient but varied zones of DaoC.

It's basically three lines.

I don't mind trying this out, but again doubt it will have the effect you hope for.

To really spice up RvR you'd need a massive overhaul: make entire zones RvR lakes, implement existint PQs with zone lock mechanism, add more BOs and even mini-keeps. The kind of work that even Mythic probably wouldn't have tried, and that would make quite a few people unhappy.

[Elymas]

No, you had your chance to stop the opposing force at the outer door, inner door, and lord.

that is a good arguement, thanks for bringing it up.
But that scenario is involving a situation where both realms most times have all their forces in one place, at the keep.
The advantage here is for who can use their numbers the best, a very very valid skill in War and besieging a keep.

but should numbers and use of numbers be the only wincondition. My proposal offers an alternative, and keep in mind its not a forced option. It simply just offers the underdogs in an outnumbered situation a chance to fight somewhat more even numbers (promoting not logging over to the winning and dominating orvr realm at the current moment)

So a more concrete situation example:
Destro have FMJ event night, they are locking zones with say 120 destro players in Praag.
Order have 80 players in the zone, they tried to hold the keep but got pushed out because they were outnumbered and had fewer organized warbands and groups.

Yes Destro had more numbers, and more organized players. I think they should win.
But if the underdogs are not having any chance for fighting when severly outnumbered, what will keep them from all just logging out or logging on destro toons.
And that is what my proposal is about, to promote fighting but still not changing the win-condition of largescale warfare.

So in my example the keep has fallen in praag, in the current system the BOs will get flagged red for destro probably within 3minuts and this is barely enough time for any order group to try and get an other attempt going for the zone (this is where some think the zone is already over and should be over)
In my proposal order could all run to Graveyard BO and setup with their 80 players. It will take destro some time to move a big enough force from the Captured keep to GY and wipe order and kill them. By the time they have moved enough forces to GY it might expose Armory BO to be attackable by an order 6man roaming, if they find a handful of pugs or an other smaller group to fight. Maybe the underdogs will get wiped and the zone locks, maybe they will stall for some time before the outnumbering realm have spread their troops out and hold all 4/4 BOs.
But the zone will still eventually lock for whoever took the keep, because of how impossible it is to lock when you have lost your keeplord and the keep is a ruin.

But the end result is that the entire zone is active, every BO matter equally much and people are pvping, coordination is rewarded wether its realmwide or withing your groups/warbands/guilds. And no matter your groupsieze you can potentially help your realm, find fights everywhere and the game is not just about bags & gear for a brief moment

I also think that zone domination really requires locking that one last BO. I mean, how else could you call it a domination victory unless you conquered the entire battlefield, through and through? In a real battle situation, would you seriously leave an enemy camping on one site, allowing them to replenish and rally their troops? If that's the case, then this "strategy" should have some serious consequences in the overall RvR campaign.

[vanbuinen77]

In that case, you attempt to split the zerg by lvling up other zones, and sieging their keep to make them choose to win their current zone or send people to stop your zone lock.

[wachlarz]

Why U want fights in locked zone ? New zone, new fights. All U write U can make in new zone. if U want more fights dont push too keep. Roam. Play small party not only in wb.

Just from opserving how players play, i Tend to watch newcomer streamers, watch old veterans, read ingame advice chat and get a general feel for how most of the community feel on a subject. Right now only really fresh 40s are interested in the box running part of a zone from when it opens, more people get involved when a keep reaches two stars and a siege is about to happen, and after the keeptage pretty much everything goes on standby.

So we go from the peak of action, into a full on afk break. I just think the potential is waste. And it has nothing to do with what size of group or if your solo. The system just doesnt promote or allow much action after a keep is flipped. So would even bother with having any BO restrictions after a keep take if we will just accept and allow the zone to be overwith after the keep has been taken.
If the most players are active at the keeptake, why not keep that activity going for the duration of the zonelock by extending this last phase of a zone duration.

You make it sound like im trying to promote something that will just benefit myself. But this system would benefit all roamers and pvpvers.
If all the warbands are fighting at a laststand BO and for example order are about to loose a zone, if they send their bigger warbands to one BO and destro have to answere this by sending their more organized forces to this location, that will open up the rest of the map for smallscale fights, ganking soloers relocationg to other BOs and spreading the action out. Isnt that what 6man groups and gankers want, more people being spread out over the map and not one big blob being all together?

No all go to this one Bo for aoe spam and 20 rr or have fun. BO need to be more potent when zone is active and ppl need to roam and fight for it. Now Bo give bonus to realm rr and box for keep. One person can make it. Ther must be somthing that a 24 ppl need to roam/fight for Bo. Give them some meaning. A mobs with alot of hp that guard BO ? When killed givs boxex only idk. Only 2 Bo active for short time So ppl need to move to them and fight for boxes. Its to easy to lvl up a keep. And solo ppl can make this.

[Strakar]

We should get the current system working again first. Last night order locked Caledor with zero BOs controlled after the keep fell.

Worth trying, I do agree with the other posters that it could slow down zone locks and would have to tweak fort or city rewards to compensate.

[wonshot]

We should get the current system working again first. Last night order locked Caledor with zero BOs controlled after the keep fell.

Worth trying, I do agree with the other posters that it could slow down zone locks and would have to tweak fort or city rewards to compensate.

Already reported and a fix is coming.
https://github.com/WarEmu/WarBugs/issues/18874
I spent around 12+ hours of compilingdata and researchign which zones were broken while reporting this, and it really did show me some player patern and behaviors about when the players are active in the zones.

Best example was in the middle of EU morning hours. Nothing organized out, Destro took T3 empire keep And all of Order agree to put up a fight in the Tower BO next to destro warcamp.
Destro came once, saw it was defended and left to go capture the other 3 / 4 bos.
That was a moment where all the fighting orderlings were ready for one more fight in the zone (about 3 total tanks and 1 healer per group in the pug wb my beastlord WH was in) and destro just opted out of even trying to take the fight instead they ran and stood on empty BOs when order had 60% aao.

Too easy to execute the lock of the zone, and whats the points of BOs if you only need 2 of them to spawn boxes and 3 to lock. Might aswel get rid of the most far away BOs on each map and keep it 3 total BOs so only one realm can spawn boxes at a time.