improving the general RvR-system - not just my two cents

[magicthighs]

Seriously, people? Necroing a thread from November last year?

[Ramasee]

It had the most constructive discussion on the topic. The discussion was on going in a different thread (but was off topic for that thread) as early as April 15th.

[freshour]

I agree this thread is pretty good. I really wish it was a simple thing to make the afk timer in warcamps be 1-2 minutes. Maybe 5 minutes tops. I have read that changing the RvR areas is a pain so making the warcamps not be RvR to leech xp, and f with AAO is not possible as I'm sure a dev would have fixed it.

I've played order and destro fairly extensively in my few months here and I notice both sides like to AFK primarily in empire. Maybe it is just a chill spot? Cool. But it royally messes with AAO, and a simple 5 min afk timer would really stop a lot of it. Heck I think 3 minutes is enough time to get a drink, take a piss, heat up some food, etc... But I've seen people afk for ages and I'm sure not all of them are intending to mess with AAO, but it REALLY does haha.

[Tiggo]

you already dont get any rewards for locks in the warcamp...

(even if you just died after 2hs fighting at the keep, respawn at WC and the zone locks before you can enter rvr zone, which is really really bad...)

[freshour]

I mean for messing with AAO primarily. I play in smaller groups as the mindless zerg drives me insane. Granted WB vs WB (both on voice chat) etc... is AMAAAAAZING and some of the most fun I've ever had on any game haha. But when it is pug-bands/freenown I usually swap with a few buddies and pick off as many people as I can. But I've noticed 10-20 people afk in warcamps and that REALLY messes with AAO.

I'm guessing you went after the rewards topic b/c the topic of AAO is a good point. Not sure why you chose to attack that other than you liking the idea of people messing with AAO? Not sure.

[Tiggo]

I'm guessing you went after the rewards topic b/c the topic of AAO is a good point. Not sure why you chose to attack that other than you liking the idea of people messing with AAO? Not sure.

" that changing the RvR areas is a pain so making the warcamps not be RvR to leech xp"

i was referring to this. So devs already CAN distinct if people are in rvr or in the wc. Excluding these players after x minutes from aao could be good idea. but there must be a grace time, when you just died in the rvr lake and respawned to still get all rewards for x minutes.

[Shutyergob]

Idk about not having guards at BOs or a Keep Lord. Without these literally 1 person running around could prevent a keep from being taken. I understand that peeps wud need 2 cover all the BOS and guard them but guard duty is quite boring, in real life and in MMOs. Having a period of time when the BO is yours followed by the NPCS providing the guard duty makes more sense IMHO. Your other ideas sound fine though.

[Ekundu01]

Just adding my two cents here.

Let me preface this by saying For this to work BO's and Keeps would need no lockouts until a zone is locked.

I am taking a page out of the way pve worked via the ward system. BO's would be your wards. The more you own the more damage and less damage you take from keep and bo npcs and more damage you cause to doors.

All NPCs and doors would have to be scaled up for this to work properly. BO's would have to be made harder to take to prevent less then a group just back capping while the attack is going on at the keep. Maybe have a slight lock out of 3-4 minutes on the BO's to prevent instant back capping.

This could possibly be applied to the AAO buff too. Give players with the AAO buff a ward system for owning BO's. This could make defending slightly better for the out numbered players instead of getting steam rolled by the zerg.

But exp, renown and inf would have to be taken away from BO caps and Keeps and just reward it all for a zone lock and just up the exp, renown, and inf gain for player kills. Zone locks would only happen if the realm held both keeps and all BO's. I suspect this would make things harder to lock a zone so zone lock out would have to be longer come city raids unless the way we get there is changed.

I think this would split up the zerging and make fighting over BO's just as important as the keep. And losing the keep would not auto lock the zone unless they have all BO's so you could still possibly defend the zone even after losing your keep.

[th3gatekeeper]

Just adding my two cents here.

Let me preface this by saying For this to work BO's and Keeps would need no lockouts until a zone is locked.

I am taking a page out of the way pve worked via the ward system. BO's would be your wards. The more you own the more damage and less damage you take from keep and bo npcs and more damage you cause to doors.

All NPCs and doors would have to be scaled up for this to work properly. BO's would have to be made harder to take to prevent less then a group just back capping while the attack is going on at the keep. Maybe have a slight lock out of 3-4 minutes on the BO's to prevent instant back capping.

This could possibly be applied to the AAO buff too. Give players with the AAO buff a ward system for owning BO's. This could make defending slightly better for the out numbered players instead of getting steam rolled by the zerg.

But exp, renown and inf would have to be taken away from BO caps and Keeps and just reward it all for a zone lock and just up the exp, renown, and inf gain for player kills. Zone locks would only happen if the realm held both keeps and all BO's. I suspect this would make things harder to lock a zone so zone lock out would have to be longer come city raids unless the way we get there is changed.

I think this would split up the zerging and make fighting over BO's just as important as the keep. And losing the keep would not auto lock the zone unless they have all BO's so you could still possibly defend the zone even after losing your keep.

I had suggested something very similar and some of the feedback I got, was that most times, RvR starts with a small group of guys who are just doing it for the BO caps/rewards. So part of me feels like this would kill some of that early momentum, and cause RvR to be less frequent than it is now.

I know Az was big/is still big maybe on removing rewards for stuff like capping an unguarded BO, as well as removing lock timers but frankly, while I agree with the idea, I think it would have negative ramifications.

So I think the best thing MIGHT be to first identify the current issues. Which I think are as follows:
- Locked BOs. Allow for zerging.
- Rewards for not doing anything of importance.
- AAO is great for kills, but very little a small group can do to deter a large WB, partly because #1.


So my thoughts would be:

1) Locked BOs. Allow for zerging
I dont think you can REMOVE locking. But I think you could look at shortening the timer TO lock to say 1 minute. Meaning once you cap it, you hold it for 1 minute and you own it. But then Cut the LOCK timer, so it only locks for say 3 minutes. What I think this does, is allows a warband to move onto the next BO but if they try to continue to zerg, you wont be able to cap all four BOs as by the time you even got to the third to cap, the first would be open.

I think you need to allow for some type of lock allowing you to move on from one BO. If it doesnt lock, you must leave a small force at EVERY BO, and it becomes very easy for a small group to come in and capture the BO from you. I think it would just require too large of sheer numbers to do it that way, so I think it requires some type of "lock".


Rewards for not doing anything of importance.
For this, I would like to see the BOs not provide much but already stated I think it would deter RvR from starting. I do like the idea of providing bonuses for the # of BOs captured... Not sure the best option though. I actually would LOVE to see AAO apply to BO takes however, so if a small group of guys HAS AAO, they can go take a BO from the WB and get 400% the rewards, making it worth while to try and then HOLD for 1:00 as thats the new lock timer, which would buy them time to try and cap other BOs as well if it does lock for 3:00. Causing a major pain in the arse for the WB/zerg forcing them to play defense/split up.

[Tesq]

The downside of this system is that only the zerg side will be able to lock this way, or none.
Cos having multiple flag drag away ppl from the main fight meaning that defendere have always a chance to block the keep attack, this not only drag away ppl from the keep fight which should be make better and not reduced in size but also give the defender the advantage of what do hitting from nothing.
If you want to have many size of groups all partaciping equally in the orvr you need to spread groups give each of em a different primary role with out negate it to do other things if they want.
You also make ppl stay stationary in one place which is also boring.
You would really stay still in 1 spot waiting 30 min other ppl lock the keep? And anyway what block defender to zerg 1 flag? basically you just give defender a chance to zerg you instead in different locations. It dosen't sound to me like a good solution.
The aim of Orvr is not giving close enviroment fights like sc is give em an open one where you can encounter more or even less ppl than you, you need to make ppl move around with different stuff so that even for the lower side there are still chance to have balanced or advantage fight over the lake. Also this i basically what happened with vp system and flags, where the losing realm just zerg 1 flag at time making impossible for the attackers to lock the zone by simple use a bait party and the whole zerg onto 2 differently flags cos just by make attackers dividing or make a last men resistence they avoided the lock. Keep ppl stationary at flag is not a good idea imo.