lose the last zone to win 4 tokens

[Alfa1986]

difficult thing is to understand why people start changing the one side to the other. everyone has his own minds and his own reasosns. I can speak for myself only, let’s say, I log in on orderside, look at the online members of the guildlist and see that there is no one online, after that I change this side and log in on destro and trying to find the guild group there. this is the first situation that challenges changing the side. the second situation, if there is no guild group in both place, then I go in and choose which side there are pug warbands is, and where the leader I like better.

[Aurandilaz]

What I'd suggest is using existing Vanq as source of gaining Invaders. With a very high conversion rate, 20:1 or 25:1. So if you do a maxed contribution in your own racial zone over hours of RvR, those 20-25 vanq you might have earned would be worth at least 1 Invader token.
Atm there is very limited interest in lower T2 T3 zones, as they barely serve any purpose for people who are trying to pursue endgame gearing.
Most people who play actively, and during "right hours", have most likely been given chance to finish at least farming 1-2 of their toons to full invader - 7+ months since forts released, with 3-5 forts per day, depending how much you want to farm before going insane, and some lucky bags... most mains from people actively doing forts should be geared out already.
So only people who play rarely, or 1-2h max per week, or are extremely unlucky with crashes etc, might still struggle finishing their first invader grind.
Assuming conversion of 20:1, you'd need 4400 vanq medals, or 220 invader medals. 25:1 and you'd need 5500 vanq to get yourself invader geared.
Maybe doable, but considering how grindy (even on RoR standards) it would be, most would still opt with doing as many forts as possible to finish invader farming.

[wpc56]

Forum ate my post

Quick summary, too late to change invader, I recommend dev implement gold bag + influence page gear progression for City and beyond.

AAO affects influence gain, no influence for recently killed player (prevent farming)

Encourage fighting in City or future pvp zone for progression instead of encouraging afk in fort.

[zachary]

If we're talking about motivation, right now defenders in a fort don't have much motivation to defend - win or lose, they get 4 tokens. I know attacking a fort is more difficult than defending, but so I'm not suggesting they get a full 6 invader tokens, but maybe 5? Right now the only motivation for a defender to do more than show up is a possible bag roll, which isn't bad, but in a full fort I think only half or so of the defenders will get a bag, no? And everyone will think "won't be me" so no one will bother to defend.

[Alfa1986]

I strongly believe that if realm is not winning - realm should recieve less (or zero) rewards and efforts of winning and pushing campaign one should be rewarded.
That said I would have done this:

1) Reward 1 invader medalion for ANY taken zone (as it pushes campaign towards fort), ones who lost it recieve 0.
2) Keep reward for won fort defence at 4, but reduce it to 2 if defenders lost.
3) Keep reward for won fort attack at 6, for lost attack it should be reduced to 2.

This system will only reward realm that pushed campaign and winning, will keep people interested in something but t4 pairing and will reduce "participation" reward for those who does not make efforts to actually win.

Even i share this point of view, i must remind :

a-If you don't reward losing side (because it is the losing side), player will join the winning one (cross realm, path of least resistance...).Same if you "punish" the losing side.

So, you maybe solve a problem, reinforcing another one. Invader is the subject, but keep in mind someday, you will have to add in the equation Warlord and Sovereign too. If you put all currencies in ORvR, then fort and cities become pointless and yes, in the end a single zone should be enough .

absolutely, if you go this way, tomorrow you will see that the zerg side will increase its numbers exponentially, while on the opposite side there will be no one left. simply because what is the point of wast the time on the losing side when if all the awards are won by the winning side anyway?

today's war is a war of zerg, no matter how you play well if the opposite side has a lot more people win it anyway. and in this case, the losing side is not to blame for their loss.
therefore, it would be reasonable (in receiving awards) not to create competition between the two realms, but to create competition inside realm, according to the contribution (somthinh like that there is today for fort). in other words, it is necessary to make the awards equal between the losers and the winners, no matter how absurd it sounds, but to make the awards given depending on the contribution, and no matter what side you are on. in this case, it will not make sense to s
reroll sides based solely on the grounds of receiving awards, renown, bags or medals.

what for invader, it would be nice to also give medal of the invader in bags from ordinary zones. for example, in blue bags 1 med, in purple bags - 2, in gold -3. This will also stimulate high-level players who already have vanq set to play at full power to get these bags. since now these awards are not really needed for them, at best these are ilut for making talismans.

[anarchypark]

absolutely, if you go this way, tomorrow you will see that the zerg side will increase its numbers exponentially, while on the opposite side there will be no one left. simply because what is the point of wast the time on the losing side when if all the awards are won by the winning side anyway?

today's war is a war of zerg, no matter how you play well if the opposite side has a lot more people win it anyway. and in this case, the losing side is not to blame for their loss.
therefore, it would be reasonable (in receiving awards) not to create competition between the two realms, but to create competition inside realm, according to the contribution (somthinh like that there is today for fort). in other words, it is necessary to make the awards equal between the losers and the winners, no matter how absurd it sounds, but to make the awards given depending on the contribution, and no matter what side you are on. in this case, it will not make sense to s
reroll sides based solely on the grounds of receiving awards, renown, bags or medals.

this produce negative experience from both side. losers get double negative.
some players are so cool they never lose.
but imagine worst case. they need extra care from system.
system should aim for all ranges. not just winners.

what for invader, it would be nice to also give medal of the invader in bags from ordinary zones. for example, in blue bags 1 med, in purple bags - 2, in gold -3. This will also stimulate high-level players who already have vanq set to play at full power to get these bags. since now these awards are not really needed for them, at best these are ilut for making talismans.

why push fort then?

[Yaliskah]

I think some start to understand how complicated is the equation... :p

[Alfa1986]

what for invader, it would be nice to also give medal of the invader in bags from ordinary zones. for example, in blue bags 1 med, in purple bags - 2, in gold -3. This will also stimulate high-level players who already have vanq set to play at full power to get these bags. since now these awards are not really needed for them, at best these are ilut for making talismans.

why push fort then?

becouse bags are given per zone only up to 10-15 ppl , and on fort, medals are given to all(60-80 ppl).

this produce negative experience from both side. losers get double negative.
some players are so cool they never lose.
but imagine worst case. they need extra care from system.
system should aim for all ranges. not just winners

There is already a random selection system so that the same people do not receive awards all the time

[Zxul]

I strongly believe that if realm is not winning - realm should recieve less (or zero) rewards and efforts of winning and pushing campaign one should be rewarded.
That said I would have done this:

1) Reward 1 invader medalion for ANY taken zone (as it pushes campaign towards fort), ones who lost it recieve 0.
2) Keep reward for won fort defence at 4, but reduce it to 2 if defenders lost.
3) Keep reward for won fort attack at 6, for lost attack it should be reduced to 2.

This system will only reward realm that pushed campaign and winning, will keep people interested in something but t4 pairing and will reduce "participation" reward for those who does not make efforts to actually win.

On the side note, what will likely happen after the above change:

"Stop defending! Once their zerg gets into their fort, we can start taking pairings for our!"

Or just 2 zergs avoiding each other, each taking pairings for their fort. "Ok, order zerg is working on emp, elf t2 we all go!"

Also, in general- as long as zerg is the most efficient way to get rewards, you can't really win. The side with the numeral advantage will steamroll- while you can't punish them for that, while the underdog will look for way to get some rewards while avoiding fights- which you can't punish them for either (or even the few playing it will switch to zerg side/log).

What you need to do is to look at the rewards wanted by each lvl/renown range, and think how do you make so it is more efficient to fight for them than to zerg. For example, low lvls speaking what is wanted is renown- currently afk carrying resources in wb is much more efficient than trying to small group fight as undergeared low lvl- since fighting will likely give you zero renown, while also loosing renown from resources (and no, removing pve renown isn't a solution, since it will mean low lvls won't be able to lvl at all- just like it happened after bo ticks were removed and before wb wide resources were added).

High lvls wise, only thing wanted atime in rvr is invader- so what you are looking for is a solution which will make non zerg fight the most efficient way to get it, both for zerg and for underdog. For zerg- because if they don't split, they will steamroll and no actual fights will happen. For underdog- they should still be able to afk for invader (cause really, no rewards for underdog while avoiding fights vs superior numbers= even the few which are on switch/log), however it should be more efficient for them to go and look for fight. Which again, requires fighting as underdog to be possible- cause non will go out and try to fight, only to be zerged again and again.

[Xavarion]

The way I see it, to the victor goes the spoils. Invader tokens for fort defense should only be rewarded for winning. In that regard the reward should be the same as an offensive victory, 6. Conversely, the loser should be rewarded nothing. So 6 invader tokens up for grabs, winner takes all.

I do, however, agree with the 1 invader for defending the last zone before fort. I say this in light of the current state of the game. At least there is something on the line to have some pride in your side and holding the line.

Final thought, is it possible to allow invader to be broken down to oppressor, like they can be broken down to vanquisher? The oppressor grind is ludicrous compared to vanquisher and invader.