Recent Topics

Ads

Suggestions to counter zerging

We want to hear your thoughts and ideas.
Forum rules
Before posting on this forum, be sure to read the Terms of Use

Structured class balance suggestions belong in the Balance Proposal subforum. Class-related discussion in this section are considered as ongoing debates and ARE NOT reviewed for balance changes.
Caduceus
Posts: 653

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#11 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:31 pm

Parallell86 wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:29 pm
Caduceus wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:21 pm
Parallell86 wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:14 pm

I am responding to your "several approaches of gameplay changes that could reduce the effectiveness of zerging."


Please quote exactly what part of my post you are responding to, because it is entirely unclear to me how anything you said relates to my post.
High demands. I dont respond well to orders. If you cant see it, or simply to **** blinded by your own pride to see my point. I got nothing else to say. Its clear you took my response and made your private vendetta. Thats a you-problem.

Let me re-phrase my post into something less confusing: Your idea is **** and will never be implemented.

What in the world O.o
"I watched a snail crawl along the edge of a straight razor. That's my dream; that's my nightmare. Crawling, slithering, along the edge of a straight razor... and surviving." - Colonel Walter E. Kurtz

Ads
User avatar
Arbich
Suspended
Posts: 788

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#12 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:40 pm

Caduceus wrote: Mon Jan 03, 2022 2:13 pm
Approach 2: Rear areas

Angle: Seeks to disincentivise zerging by introducing an ever-present threat of having one's rear areas infiltrated.

Critical factor: The penalty of having one's rear areas infiltrated, and thus one's frontlines cut off, needs to be significant enough that this threat cannot be ignored.

This is common theme in modern warfare. The way it is most commonly depicted in video games is with supply lines, which, when cut off, will greatly reduce the effectiveness of the cut off forces. Introducing a mechanic like this, which perhaps can be modeled sort of like Diminishing Rations, will encourage things like scouting over a broad front, smart positioning and manoeuvring. A zerg that gets cut off will either have to scramble to their rear areas or fight with reduced effectiveness.

Depending on how such a mechanic is designed and how heavily a side is penalized for getting their rear areas cut off, this can make zerging almost entirely ineffective. This approach can radically change the gameplay dynamic into one that offers lots of tactical problems to solve and gameplay depth.


I really like this proposal. It have a proposal for this to be implemented in LotD (Disclamer: I only participated in the first LotD test in a 6man group. we mostly roamed around and didnt pay much attention to the mechanics).

Imagine the following map:

Image

It will work as follows:

Its a race to capture the BOs one after another. So for Order to capture BO O2 they have to own O1. To capture O5, they have to own O2 and O4, but not O1 and O3...
The green or red lines are the supply lines. They always start at the own warcamp. If the supply lines get interrupted (so enemy realm captures one of the BOs behind the frontline), a map wide increasing debuff will start: At O1-O4/D1-D4 the supply lines are split. So if Order pushed the campaign to D8 and Destro captures O1 then after 2min a -2% debuff to all stats for order kicks in. This debuffs increases by 2% every minute. After 6min of Destro owning O1 it reaches the maximum, all Order in the zone have a -10% on all stats for half breaking the supply line. If destro captures O5 instead of O1, then a -4% debuff starts after 2min and increases by 4% every minute to a maximum of -20% on all stats. If Destro captures O1 and O4 each provide a -10% debuff on all stats.
So the maximum of debuff your side can get is -20% on all stats.

The BO N2 gives a Buff on all stats mapwide for your side of +5%, but only if its connected to your frontline. So if Destro has pushed to O7 and holds O8 and D9/O9 and N1+N2 they get a +5% to all their stats. At the same time if Order interrupted their supply lines (by holding D5 for example) they still get the -20% debuff on stats. If Order also captures N1, N2 or D9/O9, Destro loses the +5% buff.

Points you win the campaign are gained from kills and by pushing the enemy team in their zone (so as Order holding at least O9/D9). The further you are in the enemy zone, the more points the BO gives. But BOs that are hold for interrupting the enemy supply lines give no points. Example: Order holds O9/D9 and are the only one getting points atm, but Destro interrupted their supply lines and took all the BOs from O5 to O8. Destro also holds D8. If Order loses the BO O9/D9, the new frontline will be O5 and only Destro now get (a lot more) points from BO.
Arbich-BW/Xanthippe-WP/Schnipsel-AM

Caduceus
Posts: 653

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#13 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:45 pm

Alright, here we go:

Parallell86 wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 12:43 pm

And what if one side decides to just obstruct the other realms attempts by still zerging?


The point of the proposed changes is to make zerging less effective, so if the other realm continues zerging, they will be less effective. Kicking in open doors, but alas.

Parallell86 wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 12:43 pm

Example: 48 vs 48. One realm split up their forces to control said objectives. The other realm decides to use their entire force to run between the objectives and farm kills on their outnumbered opponents.


This has been addressed specifically in the "critical factor" under approach 1. This is why I told you to read my post thoroughly. If the zerg continues zerging, they will not be able to hold the objectives and thus lose.

Parallell86 wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 12:43 pm

Unless you just have AOE gimped by 90% if your WB is closer than 100 feet of another ally warband then people wont give a ****. Overwhelming numbers still win, and in this community people form 6 mans to gank singles. 12 mans to gank 6 mans, and 24 mans to gank 12 mans. This community play for easy kills and free bags.


In the past morale bombing functioned as an equalizer, again, addressed specifically in the elaboration under approach 4. So my proposal is nothing new. Mechanics like this have already been in the game in one form or another, and could be looked at again to make zerging less effective.


There. I tried engaging with what little you provided. Maybe the root of my confusion is clear to you now.
"I watched a snail crawl along the edge of a straight razor. That's my dream; that's my nightmare. Crawling, slithering, along the edge of a straight razor... and surviving." - Colonel Walter E. Kurtz

User avatar
Parallell86
Posts: 241

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#14 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:55 pm

:'D

Ye lets introduce this to pug warbands who cant stay with the warband, and solo roamers running between the two warcamps.

Caduceus
Posts: 653

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#15 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:17 pm

Arbich wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:40 pm
I really like this proposal. It have a proposal for this to be implemented in LotD (Disclamer: I only participated in the first LotD test in a 6man group. we mostly roamed around and didnt pay much attention to the mechanics).

Imagine the following map:

Image

It will work as follows:

Its a race to capture the BOs one after another. So for Order to capture BO O2 they have to own O1. To capture O5, they have to own O2 and O4, but not O1 and O3...
The green or red lines are the supply lines. They always start at the own warcamp. If the supply lines get interrupted (so enemy realm captures one of the BOs behind the frontline), a map wide increasing debuff will start: At O1-O4/D1-D4 the supply lines are split. So if Order pushed the campaign to D8 and Destro captures O1 then after 2min a -2% debuff to all stats for order kicks in. This debuffs increases by 2% every minute. After 6min of Destro owning O1 it reaches the maximum, all Order in the zone have a -10% on all stats for half breaking the supply line. If destro captures O5 instead of O1, then a -4% debuff starts after 2min and increases by 4% every minute to a maximum of -20% on all stats. If Destro captures O1 and O4 each provide a -10% debuff on all stats.
So the maximum of debuff your side can get is -20% on all stats.

The BO N2 gives a Buff on all stats mapwide for your side of +5%, but only if its connected to your frontline. So if Destro has pushed to O7 and holds O8 and D9/O9 and N1+N2 they get a +5% to all their stats. At the same time if Order interrupted their supply lines (by holding D5 for example) they still get the -20% debuff on stats. If Order also captures N1, N2 or D9/O9, Destro loses the +5% buff.

Points you win the campaign are gained from kills and by pushing the enemy team in their zone (so as Order holding at least O9/D9). The further you are in the enemy zone, the more points the BO gives. But BOs that are hold for interrupting the enemy supply lines give no points. Example: Order holds O9/D9 and are the only one getting points atm, but Destro interrupted their supply lines and took all the BOs from O5 to O8. Destro also holds D8. If Order loses the BO O9/D9, the new frontline will be O5 and only Destro now get (a lot more) points from BO.

That is very interesting, and I would love it if they tested something like this out. LotD seems like a great opportunity for that.


Some things that come to mind for consideration:

- There should probably be somekind of control mechanism to avoid solo players (especially stealthers) holding too much sway over the fight. NPCs could be utilized, as they already are, or maybe a minimum number required to cap flags (lets say 3+).

- Capping and holding flags in the rear areas should yield some type of reward, especially caps that break or repair a faction's supply lines, to make sure the rewards gained can compete with fighting on the frontline.

- Under this system it may be very challenging to hold BO's far up the chain. Perhaps there should also be a mechanic that ensures the fight progresses even if both sides are unable to take territory from the other, but I guess kills would already function to that end. Maybe points can be rewarded for connected territory held, regardless of which faction it naturally belongs to, but territory held on the side of the enemy is worth a lot more points?


Anyhow, great idea!

I think it would turn LotD into something unique, and perhaps even open a world of possibilities for the rest of RoR.
"I watched a snail crawl along the edge of a straight razor. That's my dream; that's my nightmare. Crawling, slithering, along the edge of a straight razor... and surviving." - Colonel Walter E. Kurtz

User avatar
Ninjagon
Posts: 475

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#16 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:28 pm

I like the original topic ideas. But nothing is simple there, with one exception - Parallell86, youre troll :-).

The LotD design can be set to favor divided forces more than just "zerg them all". But do not forget about most important thing: Fights. No fights, no fun. So if you do not fight (like nonstop running just for quick cap the objectives), you should NOT be able to win.
Ninjab - The White Lion. No Destruction character. RETRIBUTION guild.
Also: Velmires - WP, Carnow - KotbS, Ninjagon - BW, Nynja - SW, Stin - WH, and others.
Spoiler:
Image

User avatar
Cyrylius
Posts: 401

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#17 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 3:09 pm

@Caduceus while i agree with you, have you considered focusing a bit more on when people start zerging: it's usually when they start losing. It's a simple and effective way of bolstering strength for average warband, organized or not. While better players should win against worse players maybe having some of those mechanics useable in even fights would make certain situations less one-sided, so that there are still ways to punch above your weight? There are already mechanisms like this in for example keep defence being easier for defenders, maybe extending that in some form to oRvR would alleviate the zerging to some extent too.
RoR doesnt deserve being taken seriously.

User avatar
Arbich
Suspended
Posts: 788

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#18 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 3:22 pm

Caduceus wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:17 pm
- There should probably be somekind of control mechanism to avoid solo players (especially stealthers) holding too much sway over the fight. NPCs could be utilized, as they already are, or maybe a minimum number required to cap flags (lets say 3+).
Yes, either roaming NPCs who patrol the BOs or/and a minimum of ppl required to cap the flag. But the number should be quite low (3 seems fine), so your side have the strategic decision of how many ppl you will commit to guard your flags. maybe you put on guard on each BO to sign the alarm, or you send 2 groups to defend the river (from where the attack at your backline is most likely coming). Maybe the enemy will attack your backline with a full warband. Will you attack the frontline, as you probably have superior numbers there? Or will you send ppl to your backline to avoid/remove the crippling debuff?
Caduceus wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:17 pm - Capping and holding flags in the rear areas should yield some type of reward, especially caps that break or repair a faction's supply lines, to make sure the rewards gained can compete with fighting on the frontline.
Didnt thought about rewards at all, but sure.
Caduceus wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:17 pm - Under this system it may be very challenging to hold BO's far up the chain. Perhaps there should also be a mechanic that ensures the fight progresses even if both sides are unable to take territory from the other, but I guess kills would already function to that end. Maybe points can be rewarded for connected territory held, regardless of which faction it naturally belongs to, but territory held on the side of the enemy is worth a lot more points?
Well, I am always against stat buffs/debuffs tied to AAO in rvr zones, as you can do nothing against it that your side have just more ppl online atm (maybe you dont have toon on the other side or you dont want to/cant switch sides due to lockout timer). But if you roam in an RVR zone with your conquerer equipped group and meet a sov equipped group, the probably 50 more ppl of your side in total in the zone wouldn´t help you at all. The sov group will rip your group apart. It would be ridicilous if the sov group gets a stat boost on top, due to AAO in the zone. A bonus/debuff tied to AAO would therefore encourage zerging.

LodT will be equal numbers on both sides, as far as I understand. So I think its ok, if the side that pushes further (so is stronger) have more troubles the further they push.
I highly doubt there will be a stalemate, as one side is usually stronger in the large clashes, especially with the amount of ppl in the zone. What could happen (but also a wild guess) is that the stronger side decides to just sit on the middle BO D9/O9 and just defend their territory. You adjustments (or others) could be implemented then.
Caduceus wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:17 pm Anyhow, great idea!
the supply lines was your idea ;-)
Arbich-BW/Xanthippe-WP/Schnipsel-AM

Ads
User avatar
Parallell86
Posts: 241

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#19 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 3:44 pm

Ninjagon wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 2:28 pm I like the original topic ideas. But nothing is simple there, with one exception - Parallell86, youre troll :-).

The LotD design can be set to favor divided forces more than just "zerg them all". But do not forget about most important thing: Fights. No fights, no fun. So if you do not fight (like nonstop running just for quick cap the objectives), you should NOT be able to win.
Ok. Im a troll. Because I didnt like the idea. Because I see a RVR structure created to benefit wannabe-elitist with discord. And if you need a system to force people to stop zerging, then the game is doomed. Because this is the community we got now. 24 man guild warbands zerging while on live they tried their best to roam separated. Why is that? Just what I said in my earlier post. Let me add: People hate to lose. Win by any means.

You wanna stop zerging? Then stop zerging. But you dont so here we are. A gun to your head is what you really need to stop this low level gameplay. Spew ideas to play organised guilds in their hands.
Casual players will leave eventually. Guilds will fight......each other when possible. Overtime the loser will get bored and leave aswell. When the winners have nothing to fight, they leave aswell. Sorry just prediciting the outcome.

I said this before but people dont seem to get it. This is a dressup game nowadays. If people cant have crest farming and easy bags, they will take off.

Garamore
Posts: 400

Re: Suggestions to counter zerging

Post#20 » Tue Jan 04, 2022 4:22 pm

Totally agree with that part. On live we made a conscious effort to run as 24 man wbs, to leave soloers alone (even 6 mans). Sometimes it would be 2wb v 1 as they arrived at the same spot at the same time. Sometimes we would wait for fights to conclude and then join.

The mentality here is to run as a blob. Worse still, some of the elitist guilds use the blob and position off it to get kills and then make videos showing how elite they are. Whilst this is a good tactic for getting kills, its not a good tactic for building a community and increasing participation.

Hard to see how this can be changed unless those warband leaders decide to separate and run alone.
Garamore - Chosen Garamar - Marauder Garachop - Choppa Garamor - Slayer

Warband leader for Hand of Blood

https://www.twitch.tv/therealgaramore

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Hugatsaga and 26 guests