Recent Topics

Ads

Fort. suggestion

Chat about everything else - ask questions, share stories, or just hang out.
User avatar
CountTalabecland
Posts: 1026

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#31 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:58 pm

The main issue here is that the current system means that only the mid-zone (ex. Praag) doesn’t have direct Fort implications. Its pretty annoying that any time you are in the other 2/3 zones, people who want Invader have an incentive to slack but people who aren’t to Invader level Renown Rank or gear are still playing as per usual.

I like the idea of last zone Invader medals. Although this might only continue the only playing for BiS gear thing.

Though, I am sure this would then cause a “Lets lose Praag so we can get a zone that gives Invader” issue. I guess people have the right to maximize their BiS chances.
Brynnoth Goldenbeard (40/80) (IB) -- Rundin Fireheart (40/50) (RP) -- Ungrinn (40/40) (Engi)-- Bramm Bloodaxe (40/83) (Slayer) and a few Empire characters here or there, maybe even an elf.

Ads
User avatar
Collateral
Posts: 1494

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#32 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 5:24 pm

CountTalabecland wrote: Mon Jun 03, 2019 3:58 pm Though, I am sure this would then cause a “Lets lose Praag so we can get a zone that gives Invader” issue. I guess people have the right to maximize their BiS chances.
No it wouldn't if both zones had the same quest to capture the enemy keep. Whether you managed to win or lose the middle zone, you would get a chance to win invader.

Though when I think about what I proposed earlier, if one side zergs completely, they would be getting quite a bit more invader, not only from bags but from the quests as well. I guess the only way to go over that problem would be to simply give everyone 1-2 invader for locking the last zone, like it is now for fort. But then again you get to the problem of giving away the zones, since you get medals anyway.

I proposed some time back that in the last zone players should drop invader, like some people mentioned here. That would give incentive to organize at least in some way to maximize your kills, and hence reward those who decide to spend time to organize, and especially fight against the huge zergs.

User avatar
wargrimnir
Head Game Master
Posts: 8412
Contact:

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#33 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:07 pm

I wonder how much we would have to restrict loser-reward invader medallions before people start trying to win. 1 per day per character? 1 per week per account?

Anything that adds more currency to the solution is unlikely to find ground as that would require prices on gear to increase proportionally.
Image
[email protected] for exploits and cheaters.
grimnir.me Some old WAR blog

User avatar
Collateral
Posts: 1494

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#34 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:45 pm

wargrimnir wrote: Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:07 pm I wonder how much we would have to restrict loser-reward invader medallions before people start trying to win. 1 per day per character? 1 per week per account?

Anything that adds more currency to the solution is unlikely to find ground as that would require prices on gear to increase proportionally.
Why not make it like any other currency in rvr then? You can get it from drops and from bags/zone locks. Except invader would only drop in last zones and forts (you can even set a drop chance to it to make it even harder). If it requires the price to go up, then increase it. You can do an approximate calculation, just like you did now I'm sure, and figure out the cost. No one complains about the cost of vanq and conq gear. You play the game and eventually you earn it. But in case of invader, it can so happen that you don't get to play many forts, or maybe your game crashes every time or lags too much and you can't play in them. In that case you probably won't see the full set in a year or more, which is ridiculous imo for a dead mmo. Now I know you will say 'then don't play forts, you have other gear'. But you want your players to feel progress I hope, and the end game to have a purposes and reason to play, no?

I guess knowing exactly how many forts you have to do kinda bums people out. It's 55 or so right? So instantly you gave them a job. They play for that purpose. They calculate how many times they have to do it so they can be done with it, instead of simply playing the game and enjoying it, while getting rewarded for their efforts and time invested. Yes some people already have full invader, but you can't balance around such people who play very often, because no matter the price of gear, they would get it in a short amount of time anyway. Now everyone gets the same reward (basically the majority of people in a fort). So those who put in effort to organize and fight the zerg get the same reward as those who take the path of least resistance and just mindlessly blob like zombies. I personally don't like that system and think you guys can do much better, especially if cities are coming, together with more new gear.

dirnsterer
Posts: 199

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#35 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 8:44 pm

Why not make forts drop one invader per year for an account so people keep playing for the next hundred or so years. That is how it works, honest.

User avatar
Ototo
Posts: 1012

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#36 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:58 pm

Collateral wrote: Mon Jun 03, 2019 7:45 pm
wargrimnir wrote: Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:07 pm I wonder how much we would have to restrict loser-reward invader medallions before people start trying to win. 1 per day per character? 1 per week per account?

Anything that adds more currency to the solution is unlikely to find ground as that would require prices on gear to increase proportionally.
Why not make it like any other currency in rvr then? You can get it from drops and from bags/zone locks. Except invader would only drop in last zones and forts (you can even set a drop chance to it to make it even harder). If it requires the price to go up, then increase it. You can do an approximate calculation, just like you did now I'm sure, and figure out the cost. No one complains about the cost of vanq and conq gear. You play the game and eventually you earn it. But in case of invader, it can so happen that you don't get to play many forts, or maybe your game crashes every time or lags too much and you can't play in them. In that case you probably won't see the full set in a year or more, which is ridiculous imo for a dead mmo. Now I know you will say 'then don't play forts, you have other gear'. But you want your players to feel progress I hope, and the end game to have a purposes and reason to play, no?

I guess knowing exactly how many forts you have to do kinda bums people out. It's 55 or so right? So instantly you gave them a job. They play for that purpose. They calculate how many times they have to do it so they can be done with it, instead of simply playing the game and enjoying it, while getting rewarded for their efforts and time invested. Yes some people already have full invader, but you can't balance around such people who play very often, because no matter the price of gear, they would get it in a short amount of time anyway. Now everyone gets the same reward (basically the majority of people in a fort). So those who put in effort to organize and fight the zerg get the same reward as those who take the path of least resistance and just mindlessly blob like zombies. I personally don't like that system and think you guys can do much better, especially if cities are coming, together with more new gear.
You currently need 54 forts, if you are unlucky, to complete Invader. I think that increasing that grind will simply put Inv out of the hands of any casual player. Hardcore are hardcore, and no matter what you do, they will grind items in no-time. Increasing here can only damage casuals. Instead place lockouts.
Spoiler:

User avatar
Dackle
Posts: 141

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#37 » Mon Jun 03, 2019 9:59 pm

wargrimnir wrote: Mon Jun 03, 2019 6:07 pm I wonder how much we would have to restrict loser-reward invader medallions before people start trying to win. 1 per day per character? 1 per week per account?

Anything that adds more currency to the solution is unlikely to find ground as that would require prices on gear to increase proportionally.
If you included an 8 hour lockout timer. Once flagged, you're on that side for 8 hours. Suck it up.

User avatar
Alfa1986
Posts: 541

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#38 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 4:26 am

in my opinion you are not discussing what is necessary. Well, you get your set invader and then what? Is he much better than Vanq? even worse for some classes. the problem is that the forts do not fulfill the role of the high-end content, which he thought of. when do forts mostly happen? when either there is no resistance, or this resistance is minimal, with very low online. in the prime time to block the zone and go to the fort is almost not realistic, neither side, so the main battles and loyal resistance are found just at this time. the question arises who is the fastest to get the invader set? one who fights better?
not. the one who can sit at the computer 24 hours a day and load the game when favorable conditions are created to create a fort even more so when it doesn’t matter whether you win or lose, you still get your 4 medallions.
15th orks on a dead elf's chest
yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

Ads
User avatar
TiberiusD
Posts: 378

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#39 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 6:10 am

Here is my thought about forts. Since the changes i went inside a couple of times. Both attacking and defending. The new fashion is to hold ground floor and funnel. Nothing to do against it. But when you see people not guarding postern and when you see choppas, maras and WEs entering in the backline killing a lot coordinated with main entrance push, there is a big problem.
In my opinion, here is what it needs to be done. Make postern access harder. Like in order to enter inside fort, make the doors attackable. So that people inside can see that is something wrong and they can prepare properly. Put their HP to around a siege weapon one. Or a bit more, so to take some time to break it, only available to 3rd stage.
If not, everytime there is a fort, in loading screen a youtube video pops to explain the idiots how to defend and how to attack properly.
Order is blaming destro for wining, destro is blaming order for wining.is this kindergarden?

Doom123
Posts: 46

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#40 » Tue Jun 04, 2019 11:12 am

Honestly the moment I saw people cheering on a loss and berating people who still try defend I cringed hard.

If you have people rooting on for their own loss you have something wrong with your game mechanic. I certainly endorse the OP suggestion, I also suggested that perhaps if it is not possible to make Inv Medals as rewards that a vendor is added that can turn Vanquisher Medallions into Invader Medallions (with a decent margin, like 100 Vanquisher for 1 Invader or something, numbers are up to debate).

This way you are not hindered by not getting Inv Medals if you actually play like you should, fighting at 100% for your realms dominance. You do a good job you get allot on Vanquisher Medals that you turn into Invader, which would also address the uselessness of the damn things once you are in full Vanq (yes you can rank them down for pots, but I think everyone has more than enough Officer Meds to not need to do this).

I heard City Sieges are on their way, please do not release these without addressing this glaring issue.

Hell I am sure many Xrealmers would dissipate as well once you make Invader Medals more available through actually playing hard for your realm, cause people just shift factions to bring about a faster Fort. If you make the Fort just one of the ways to obtain Invader Medallions you create an environment where you have people actually channeling proper realm pride, and not just switching chairs when they see they can profit more for their progression.

You guys have a good thing, please do not let it fail due to stagnation and unwillingness to improve.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], raphah and 5 guests