Recent Topics

Ads

Cancelled

Let's talk about... everything else

Moderators: Developer, Management, Web Developer

Jabba
Posts: 227

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#71 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:17 am

carthagerising wrote:
Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:01 am
people should try to work on approaching mass rvr different, organising flanks and coordinating the various wbs like an army rather than just blobbing up or tyring to balance the game around 24 taking on massive numbers so they can feel "skilled".
Isn't that the whole point of making a guild warband ? So you can go and try and test yourself, and your group, against others and see how you perform and then try and improve?
Last edited by Jabba on Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
Tushi Psychotik Splatter Emoalbino Podge

Ads
User avatar
drmordread
Posts: 906

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#72 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:18 am

You want competitive game play? Form a competitive 6 man and do scenarios.

I mean really, I just don't get it. You want half the players in a zone to sit out and not fight on a BO, because you want "competitive" play? Because you don't want to be zerged, or you dont want other side to run away from your sides big zerg? So you asking that people sit out, do nothing, get no RR, while you get yours?

Damn selfish bro!!!!

Edit;
This is why there are multiple zones available for you to fight in. No big zerg, but everyone wants to be in same zone.
Image
Morrdread Ladydread Kickyerbutt Tamorrah Whisperrss SutSut Amniell
Lolyou Tahw Fortuna Sarissa Yiorrrgos
(and eight more to keep you guessing)

User avatar
wonshot
Posts: 599

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#73 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:43 am

Scenarios? Really? That content have had no campagn impact since the Victory point system on Live. People need to see SCs for what they really are, a break from oRvR, smallscale and no matter if you side wins or loses the outcome will only affect yourself and not the realm.

Speak about selfish ;)

People are more than welcome to play however they want, 1v1, smallman, 6man scs, 24man organized warband, pugging, zerging or however you prefer!

But more than anything it just baffles me how people are so obsessed about their progression, wether it being Renown rank, obtaining gear, growing their chars to become stronger and their best version. And when they reach that point, the motivation and will to improve further just disappears?!. When the game no longer shows you the pathway to improve beond that. So either you quit or reroll in 9/10 cases on here.

Getting involved with likeminded players (no matter what scale you desire) getting correct setups, learning tactics, assigning roles, sorting out communication paterns, building up teamplay and synergy are all the untrackable ingame improvements that majority of this server's community seem to skip or not strive to tackle.

No instead, lets run 2guild warbands, coordinate with an other guild, organize the entire zone.

But when citysieges come, the best gear you zerglings and lazy casuals desire. You will finally understand why some want to actually make a fully functional warband that is able to stand on its own.

Because you will be on your own! Locked to the same city instance, no chance of jumping instance, you will use your weekly lockout and maybe get a green back and the world will seem unfair!
Bombling BW RR 89 [Line by Line]
1.100 Invader crests on one char. 3/3 Royal gearsets. 600.000+ oRvR kills
Alts: Gombling[invader] | Chopling[invader] | Magnetling[invader] | Orderling[onslaught]

Heladin
Posts: 25

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#74 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 12:14 pm

wonshot wrote:
Sun Oct 13, 2019 10:43 am

But when citysieges come, the best gear you zerglings and lazy casuals desire. You will finally understand why some want to actually make a fully functional warband that is able to stand on its own.

Because you will be on your own! Locked to the same city instance, no chance of jumping instance, you will use your weekly lockout and maybe get a green back and the world will seem unfair!
how long do you believe that IF city siege is 24 vs 24 will last? i expect Devs to listen to all this fustration you describe and eventyally make em like forts. YAY... not

User avatar
mjwrench
Posts: 18

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#75 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 2:49 pm

Siege weps are place-able on the field, right? Buff the dmg for siege (maybe buff ammo amount and narrowing AoE dmg cone?). People would utilize them more on the field to break or harass zergs. This will start creating a more unpredictable but also predictable battlefield with players scouting for their zergs.
In time this will change overall combat mentality like not bunching up, flanking, and strategic importance on the field.

I know field geometry is also a factor and it would be a weird request to ask the devs to add barriers to create a more defined field, like Reikland or Thunder Mountain. Not sure how people would feel in losing freedom of travel.

Just an idea.

User avatar
cleanharry030
Posts: 27

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#76 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 4:23 pm

This is my approach to RvR and i am not implicating that anyone else should do the same:

When i lead i ignore Duels 1vs1 and 6man premades. For grossly uneven fights i sometimes dismount and help but in general i try to take fights with other warbands only. The reason for that is very simple, i am a long time DAoC Veteran and this behaviour was taught to me as i basically grew up with that game. The RvR system we have right now has nothing to do with the way players behave. It is a decision and nothing else. If we want to have some kind of basic rules we have to enforce them ourselves.

I remember my first few fights in DAoC as i added into duels or fights between premades. A kind player named Jemrik whispered me and explained to me why i should not add into fights and that my behaviour would be remembered by other players and eventually have consequences in form of bad reputation and people avoiding playing with me.

I took that lesson to heart and from that time on i didn't add any fights and instead watched them and cheered or in any other way emoted friendly or enemy players. Learning to respect my enemy and of course my own realm members helped me eventually find my own premade and guild.

On the other hand there were always people who would not play by these rules, they added into fights, leeched RP and formed Battle Groups to roll over the enemy realms with very little effort. But the majority of players still apply these basic rules and they mostly work to this day.

Sorry for wall of text. TLDR: It is your own decision to add into even fights or not and has nothing to do with the current system. Emain macha i miss you.
Ybilla WP / Valrelen DoK

Not Good Enough / NGE

Zxul
Posts: 743

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#77 » Sun Oct 13, 2019 11:10 pm

cleanharry030 wrote:
Sun Oct 13, 2019 4:23 pm
stuff
On the side note I still miss AoC Rage server. Open pvp everywhere including pve zones, + player loot. When you run into fight, you just kill both sides and loot them.

Extra points, since in AoC stealth is available to all classes, made things even more interesting.
"Can we play with him, master? He seems so unhappy. Let us help him smile. Please? Or at least let us carve one on his face when he stops screaming."

— Azeila, Alluress of Slaanesh

User avatar
Glorian
Posts: 4627

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#78 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:11 am

madrocks wrote:
Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:39 pm
Good day everyone,

I want to propose an agreement between all PUG and Guild War band leaders on both realms.
We can't communicate ingame, so the forum is the only place I think we could officially discuss this and come to an agreement.
Please do not mistake this proposal as a sort of trolling. It is a serious request, especially to guild warband leaders.
If any of you want to see more competitive gameplay in the open rvr zones we need to discuss this without pointing the finger to the other realm.

The proposed treaty:
1. Battlefield objective outside of fort zones shall not be attacked or defended with more then 2 warbands stacked up at a time.
2. Roaming in the RvR zone shall not be done with more then 2 warbands stacked up at a time.
3. Ambush and tactical movements into battle shall not be done with more then 2 warbands stacked at a time.
4. A blob of more then 2 warbands at a time is only tolerated to push out of keep/war camp camping, to defend the ram and siege the keep.
5. Forts are not part of the agreement.

I can promise you if we don't get a hold on this situation, the population will continiusly drop.
The 3rd Bitterstone Thunderers will sign this agreement.
We usually try to support one of our Alliance Warbands. True in the past we rode the "Grand Alliance of Order"-Zerg, but these days are gone for more than a year. Nowadays we roam alone or try to support VII Legion or CNTK. These two are rarely on the same spot and most of the time with 3fg.

Although there is no grand overall communication about the order warbands in a zone. So I can't guarantee that 3 warbands will not move on the center BO in Dragonwake at the same time, or on similiar spots on the maps.

cheers
Lesti

Ads
User avatar
Acidic
Posts: 1593
Contact:

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#79 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:53 am

Glorian wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:11 am
Spoiler:
madrocks wrote:
Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:39 pm
Good day everyone,

I want to propose an agreement between all PUG and Guild War band leaders on both realms.
We can't communicate ingame, so the forum is the only place I think we could officially discuss this and come to an agreement.
Please do not mistake this proposal as a sort of trolling. It is a serious request, especially to guild warband leaders.
If any of you want to see more competitive gameplay in the open rvr zones we need to discuss this without pointing the finger to the other realm.

The proposed treaty:
1. Battlefield objective outside of fort zones shall not be attacked or defended with more then 2 warbands stacked up at a time.
2. Roaming in the RvR zone shall not be done with more then 2 warbands stacked up at a time.
3. Ambush and tactical movements into battle shall not be done with more then 2 warbands stacked at a time.
4. A blob of more then 2 warbands at a time is only tolerated to push out of keep/war camp camping, to defend the ram and siege the keep.
5. Forts are not part of the agreement.

I can promise you if we don't get a hold on this situation, the population will continiusly drop.
The 3rd Bitterstone Thunderers will sign this agreement.
We usually try to support one of our Alliance Warbands. True in the past we rode the "Grand Alliance of Order"-Zerg, but these days are gone for more than a year. Nowadays we roam alone or try to support VII Legion or CNTK. These two are rarely on the same spot and most of the time with 3fg.

Although there is no grand overall communication about the order warbands in a zone. So I can't guarantee that 3 warbands will not move on the center BO in Dragonwake at the same time, or on similiar spots on the maps.

cheers
Lesti
Probably the most positive answer on this thread
But then again I like BT even if I don’t have Order toons

User avatar
madrocks
Posts: 137

Re: No zerg agreement

Post#80 » Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:56 am

Glorian wrote:
Mon Oct 14, 2019 9:11 am
Spoiler:
madrocks wrote:
Fri Oct 11, 2019 12:39 pm
Good day everyone,

I want to propose an agreement between all PUG and Guild War band leaders on both realms.
We can't communicate ingame, so the forum is the only place I think we could officially discuss this and come to an agreement.
Please do not mistake this proposal as a sort of trolling. It is a serious request, especially to guild warband leaders.
If any of you want to see more competitive gameplay in the open rvr zones we need to discuss this without pointing the finger to the other realm.

The proposed treaty:
1. Battlefield objective outside of fort zones shall not be attacked or defended with more then 2 warbands stacked up at a time.
2. Roaming in the RvR zone shall not be done with more then 2 warbands stacked up at a time.
3. Ambush and tactical movements into battle shall not be done with more then 2 warbands stacked at a time.
4. A blob of more then 2 warbands at a time is only tolerated to push out of keep/war camp camping, to defend the ram and siege the keep.
5. Forts are not part of the agreement.

I can promise you if we don't get a hold on this situation, the population will continiusly drop.
The 3rd Bitterstone Thunderers will sign this agreement.
We usually try to support one of our Alliance Warbands. True in the past we rode the "Grand Alliance of Order"-Zerg, but these days are gone for more than a year. Nowadays we roam alone or try to support VII Legion or CNTK. These two are rarely on the same spot and most of the time with 3fg.

Although there is no grand overall communication about the order warbands in a zone. So I can't guarantee that 3 warbands will not move on the center BO in Dragonwake at the same time, or on similiar spots on the maps.

cheers
Lesti
Best man!
I totally agree that a 3rd warband can show up at any time anywhere. It is what it is, war is not fair.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Tragedy and 29 guests