Lockout system is a failure and some people takes advantage of it

[arturziomas]

Maybe both, what it doesn't mean however is that all destro classes are somehow amazingly op and broken like the other poster tried to suggest.

That's a wrong assumption. It could mean that the organized guilds log to the underdog (order in this case) for AAO and better farming.

It could mean that, it could also mean that blob meta favors the side with better ranged aoe classes. Either way asking for some blanket destro nerfs seems tone deaf to me.

[tefnaht]

The lockout system works as intended, to balance the game when one side is underpopulated. Obviously, it still needs adjustments, and as stated in the roadmap, we need to see it completed with the campaign system to truly understand how it works.

Hard to image how to change campaign system where xrealm do not abuse it. Maybe some sort of LotD rules in oRvR, first side that hit X score - lock zone, no matter what keep and BO state, each kill generate score, each BO generate score, hold enemy keep also generate score, X depends on enemy keep stars. If org wb interested only in kill count - let's campaign progress moves with it. Above it - if lockout debuff on, count kills as opposite side score. Lock reward = some constant*(current score / target score).

[Aisha]

The lockout system works as intended, to balance the game when one side is underpopulated. Obviously, it still needs adjustments, and as stated in the roadmap, we need to see it completed with the campaign system to truly understand how it works.

Hard to image how to change campaign system where xrealm do not abuse it. Maybe some sort of LotD rules in oRvR, first side that hit X score - lock zone, no matter what keep and BO state, each kill generate score, each BO generate score, hold enemy keep also generate score, X depends on enemy keep stars. If org wb interested only in kill count - let's campaign progress moves with it. Above it - if lockout debuff on, count kills as opposite side score. Lock reward = some constant*(current score / target score).

It has been pointed out in this thread, xrealm has been used to have fights and kill enemies, how is that abuse? In a pvp oriented game we should ALL be glad having opponents to play with, or are we loving pvd door that much in order to get our toons geared the easiest way possible?
I respect your opinion but i disagree, those guys shouldn’t be penalised, completely the opposite, they should be rewarded for making this game more enjoyable.

[gersy]

It has been pointed out in this thread, xrealm has been used to have fights and kill enemies, how is that abuse? In a pvp oriented game we should ALL be glad having opponents to play with, or are we loving pvd door that much in order to get our toons geared the easiest way possible?
I respect your opinion but i disagree, those guys shouldn’t be penalised, completely the opposite, they should be rewarded for making this game more enjoyable.

+1

[Akalukz]

The lockout system works as intended, to balance the game when one side is underpopulated. Obviously, it still needs adjustments, and as stated in the roadmap, we need to see it completed with the campaign system to truly understand how it works.

Hard to image how to change campaign system where xrealm do not abuse it. Maybe some sort of LotD rules in oRvR, first side that hit X score - lock zone, no matter what keep and BO state, each kill generate score, each BO generate score, hold enemy keep also generate score, X depends on enemy keep stars. If org wb interested only in kill count - let's campaign progress moves with it. Above it - if lockout debuff on, count kills as opposite side score. Lock reward = some constant*(current score / target score).

It has been pointed out in this thread, xrealm has been used to have fights and kill enemies, how is that abuse? In a pvp oriented game we should ALL be glad having opponents to play with, or are we loving pvd door that much in order to get our toons geared the easiest way possible?
I respect your opinion but i disagree, those guys shouldn’t be penalised, completely the opposite, they should be rewarded for making this game more enjoyable.

Agree, UNLESS they are intentionally leading and pushing for a seige / fort then cross realm to farm. That is griefing no matter how you look at it.

[reyaloran]

The lockout system works as intended, to balance the game when one side is underpopulated. Obviously, it still needs adjustments, and as stated in the roadmap, we need to see it completed with the campaign system to truly understand how it works.

Hard to image how to change campaign system where xrealm do not abuse it. Maybe some sort of LotD rules in oRvR, first side that hit X score - lock zone, no matter what keep and BO state, each kill generate score, each BO generate score, hold enemy keep also generate score, X depends on enemy keep stars. If org wb interested only in kill count - let's campaign progress moves with it. Above it - if lockout debuff on, count kills as opposite side score. Lock reward = some constant*(current score / target score).

It has been pointed out in this thread, xrealm has been used to have fights and kill enemies, how is that abuse? In a pvp oriented game we should ALL be glad having opponents to play with, or are we loving pvd door that much in order to get our toons geared the easiest way possible?
I respect your opinion but i disagree, those guys shouldn’t be penalised, completely the opposite, they should be rewarded for making this game more enjoyable.

The issue with this mentality is it causes the wait until 100% aao mentality to siege in the first place. Now you have to wait to have enough advantage to still have a chance when you loose a full wb to the other side causing a ~50 player change in numbers. If the lockout allowed changing between zones that issue would not exist and you would see more 20-40% aao real sieges happening. I am all for PVP but that is just killing PVP for 30 min so that enough advantage can be created to allow PVP to continue.

[Akalukz]

They could add a quota of allowable xrealm per 5 minute increments. like 5 people every 5 mins or so. WB would take upwards of half hour. Similar to what was done with BO portals, there was a reason that you can no longer port 24 people at the same time to a BO. Why allow it as a realm. I think same should be implemented for guild flight to keep as well. x # of players per 5 min. Probablly 6 instead of 5 players

[Alubert]

As far as I'm concerned, the new system is working as it should.
Weaker players feel more confident in a Zerg match, while skilled players looking for opponents join the smaller side in search of an AAO.

I think that was the goal of the new system, and it has been achieved.

[kpihuss]

As a idea: a easy way to tune the lockout is to limit the possibility of switching sides once without restrictions, as is currently the case; and for the second switch, players should have to wait 90-120 minutes, as before.

This would create a hybrid system that promotes balance between realms while preventing a yo-yo effect with cross-realm play.

[Aisha]

Hard to image how to change campaign system where xrealm do not abuse it. Maybe some sort of LotD rules in oRvR, first side that hit X score - lock zone, no matter what keep and BO state, each kill generate score, each BO generate score, hold enemy keep also generate score, X depends on enemy keep stars. If org wb interested only in kill count - let's campaign progress moves with it. Above it - if lockout debuff on, count kills as opposite side score. Lock reward = some constant*(current score / target score).

It has been pointed out in this thread, xrealm has been used to have fights and kill enemies, how is that abuse? In a pvp oriented game we should ALL be glad having opponents to play with, or are we loving pvd door that much in order to get our toons geared the easiest way possible?
I respect your opinion but i disagree, those guys shouldn’t be penalised, completely the opposite, they should be rewarded for making this game more enjoyable.

The issue with this mentality is it causes the wait until 100% aao mentality to siege in the first place. Now you have to wait to have enough advantage to still have a chance when you loose a full wb to the other side causing a ~50 player change in numbers. If the lockout allowed changing between zones that issue would not exist and you would see more 20-40% aao real sieges happening. I am all for PVP but that is just killing PVP for 30 min so that enough advantage can be created to allow PVP to continue.

Thats the thing. Ive been inside keep with 100% aao with the intention to defend it, then looked around and there isnt not even a wb there, ppl are mostly around the map trying to kill something and dodge defence.
Which gives me back to the pvd door… you mentioned 50 ppl swapping (maybe i understood wrongly) that makes a difference in those cases. Heck, id be happy if only 12 come to my side and stood with me.
Then again, all of us have a different point of view and how we perceive our surroundings, none will ever be happy.