Forcing People To Cap Other Regions

[Dresden]

Any incentive to favour one area over another would happily pull me to other areas.

If xp/ren/inf/ getting was higher in emptier zones then at least small warbands could gankwar each other.

[TenTonHammer]

No, i dont want to deal with that caner system again

doe no one remember how when we were all stuck in T2 and the devs put in that system and people were stalemated for lik 6 hours going back and forth infront on mandreds?

that was dull, and unbelievably boring

[Azarael]

No, i dont want to deal with that caner system again

doe no one remember how when we were all stuck in T2 and the devs put in that system and people were stalemated for lik 6 hours going back and forth infront on mandreds?

that was dull, and unbelievably boring

And what we have now isn't?

[Dabbart]

No, i dont want to deal with that caner system again

doe no one remember how when we were all stuck in T2 and the devs put in that system and people were stalemated for lik 6 hours going back and forth infront on mandreds?

that was dull, and unbelievably boring

And what we have now isn't?

Well... I think a good indication of how a single Realm would work is in T4 currently. Once 2 of the area's get capped, what happens? The stalemates occur from time to time. But I've found that tends to happen more-so over time of the day issues(IE the EU crowd all passed out after the 2nd cap, and the NA crowd just doesn't have the pop to push BC/KV)

So instead of making assumptions one way or the other, we have a way to "judge" how the playerbase deals with said system.

Also, how ORvR works in the lower tiers has always been Shite. T2-3 really loves to just zerg from WC to WC, hell all the tiers do it, but T2 has historically been the worst(why I hate that Tier the most) But no reason not to try something out. Just cause you can't cap the zone doesn't mean you can't go Roam. Hell, you might actually get some damn good small party battles in the "locked" zones since they wont have to worry about mass zergs rolling through...

[Gerv]

Might it not also be a simple way to test the current upgrades the server had with dealing with a mass number of players in one area in preparation for the eventual implementation of forts (if they do come in) in one way or another?

[NoRKaLKiLLa]

Forcing the T4 fight into one zone would be terrible. As it stands, with even numbers a keep is impossible to take. We've seen thunder mountain and praag sit in a stalemate for 48 hours at a time being the only contestable , only being locked either way when the defending team is massively outnumbered. The great thing about the current system is that even when the numbers are square even, with communication and cooperation you can delay the enemy faction in one zone while prepping another. The faction that is slow to shift focus and react accordingly will lose every time. Forcing the fight into one zone will see a reduction in the application of teamwork and an increase in thoughtless head butting between the two factions.

[TenTonHammer]

And what we have now isn't?

No, it isnt, that previous bothched system either resulted in a zerg steam roll through each zone or aggravating stalemates, 3 zones unlocked means that there are never real stalemntes as you can try to move to another zone to "reset" the conflict and takes away the steam roll potential of zergs as they cant be in 3 zones at once

[Jaycub]

Server is in beta, just roll it out for a week... if it **** revert it.

As things are now I personally don't even bother with RvR unless it's farming players attacking a keep w/ AAO.

[gorubete]

Just spitballing here, and I have no idea if this is even *possible*, but what about instead of restricting zones T1/T2/T3 were set to have increased zone lock rewards based on how long it has been since the zone last locked (by either faction, in an attempt to discourage the easy route of avoiding the enemy altogether for mindless XP/RP/Inf?)

This would encourage playing in more than one zone for smaller parties/warbands shaking up emptier realms for better rewards. Players have a reason to compete for the zones, but are still able to split their efforts if they're in a stalemate.

Since these are lower tiers where people are mostly (afaict) just trying to level up for T4 in a non-boring way, there is hopefully less of a sustainability issue in using progression meters at these levels than at endgame. Of course, maybe I am missing the point of trying to avoid XP/RP/Inf carrots when I say that.

[Nekkma]

Try it in T1 and T4. T2-3 do not have enough population for it I would say. I would rather cap empty keeps in T2-3 to get some influence than just sit around doing nothing.

However, a better solution in my opinion would be to add renown and influence to BOs again. Currently there is no incentive to be in RvR if you cannot take/defend a keep. Besdies this situation the zones are empty. Because the zones are empty no one even bothers with them. This is a downward spiral which leaves RvR dead most of the day.

Renown and influence on BOs would keep people in the RvR zones even if keeps cannot be taken. Players in the RvR zones means there is something to kill and gankers and smaller group from the underdog side starts to form. This leads to an upward spiral as fights in RvR generate more people in the lake.