Realm Champions not needed, we need Time Zone Champions

[Sulorie]

We should all play solo, then no zergs

This opens just another can of worms.

[wonshot]

The thing is also, it very much depends on who is online in EU primetime. Different weekdays have different event-guilds. Tonight Destro had more guild events than order had it seemed in Thundermountain, and Brugon was running and impromtu midday warband getting some campaign progress done. Does that mean we should instantly jump to conclusions about Destro momentum swing is finally here?

Over the last year or so of knowing roughly which guilds have events on each week day, id say Order have dominated roughly 8 months and destro have had 4 months out of the last year in pushing to the enemy capital. But most of the times keep takes are just not happening because guilds are not wanting to waste their limmited 1-4 hour guild event on sitting looking at doors, or because its really hard taking a keep from a packed organized defence.

From day to day, that will differ depending on who is actually playing.
The game is already too torn between trying to balance between solo, smallscale, 6man ranked, guild, alliance, zerg. If you start trying to balance just based on who is online on a tuesday compared to on a sunday it will for real become a hot mess.

I do agree that after a certain 60-80% aao orvr can become really difficult to get anything objective based done as underdog apart from ganking for rp, and that should probably be adressed for the NA crowd.

[provide]

Why are most arguments in this thread about order vs destro once again, when the proposed solution would clearly benefit the whole server, no matter which side has the upper hand at that moment.

If you put a limit on people that can join the fight in a specific map/region/whatever) this benefits the general gameplay no matter who has more numbers. A side effect would even be that those people who can't get in will play in other zones which created a whole new dynamic (which the server desperately needs imo).
The only party who could argue against this are the ones who prefer to just walk through zones, without the necessity to fight at all, just to get quick rewards.

So stop perceiving this as black and white, order vs destro and see the overall benefits we could get from it please.

Now kiss.

[tazdingo]

If you put a limit on people that can join the fight in a specific map/region/whatever) this benefits the general gameplay no matter who has more numbers. A side effect would even be that those people who can't get in will play in other zones which created a whole new dynamic (which the server desperately needs imo).

some of the best changes that ror has made since live are the qol updates that encourage "drop in and play." contribution being saved across zones, bags being mailed to you, contribution being gained through a wider array of tasks. all of this stops you having to make the decision of "i only have 3 hours tonight. is it worth me even logging in? will i get -anything- for my time?"

for a lot of casual players, if they log in and then are told that they can't join the most active zone, they will log out and go do something else. the majority of players simply jump in and join a pub wb, something that is way easier and more rewarding to do then it was on live. if you stop catering to them they will stop playing, and you have to view ror as an ecosystem - if you get rid of pubs, you get rid of the food for organized bands and roamers, and soon enough they will stop playing too

the only thing that stops this nonsense is a longer lockout timer. 40/60/80 aao are natural swings, completely playable as the underdog as long as you are aware of it. the thing is, it never sits at 60 for very long - as soon as many people see that number they instantly log and it hits 200. that's when it gets unplayable

[inoeth]

we regularly getting buffed? what?
we perma snare? what?

i have the feeling that ppl just make up stories and others believe and repeat them without checking.... and there you go another WE cry thread.

stupid

[provide]

for a lot of casual players, if they log in and then are told that they can't join the most active zone, they will log out and go do something else. the majority of players simply jump in and join a pub wb, something that is way easier and more rewarding to do then it was on live. if you stop catering to them they will stop playing, and you have to view ror as an ecosystem - if you get rid of pubs, you get rid of the food for organized bands and roamers, and soon enough they will stop playing too

I respectfully disagree. I don't believe what you are saying is true but we have no way in knowing. If you offer an attractive alternative and that would be running in a pug through a different zone, I see no evidence that this couldn't be as engaging or even more so as the current "meta". I remember, just a year back, when some pug warband leaders (Beastz anyone?) did this on their own. It was the most fun I had in pug warbands. Strategizing, opening up different maps and not running in the big zerg/zone. This is what we need more of (and a limit would force this). Less mindless big zergs where one side has no chance anyways, where my dog could press the keys on my keyboard, back to more diverse gameplay spread over multiple zones.
As I said before. A limit doesn't have to be a hard limit, make it dynamic and tweak it as needed.

I really hope the majority of the people are not here for the mindless zerg but just tolerate it. If a mindless zerg is really what people want, as you suggest, a decision/statement should be made by the devs, if that's the direction this server wants to (keep) taking. At that point we can stop discussing (better imo) alternatives.

[Everdin]

Why are most arguments in this thread about order vs destro once again, when the proposed solution would clearly benefit the whole server, no matter which side has the upper hand at that moment.

If you put a limit on people that can join the fight in a specific map/region/whatever) this benefits the general gameplay no matter who has more numbers. A side effect would even be that those people who can't get in will play in other zones which created a whole new dynamic (which the server desperately needs imo).
The only party who could argue against this are the ones who prefer to just walk through zones, without the necessity to fight at all, just to get quick rewards.

So stop perceiving this as black and white, order vs destro and see the overall benefits we could get from it please.

Now kiss.

Just Imagine a 200 player cap:

If there are 500 Order and 200 Destro players Online,
there would be a great fight in a caped zone with 200 vs 200...
...one Zone would get crushed 200:0...
...the third zone would get crushed 100:0.

Of course there could be some mechanics forcing 150 of the 300 guys to play destro, but this will not happen, maybe 50 (or let it be 100) of them who already have destro toons would consider this, but 50 people would just log off and never look back.

Best proposals here are: Opportunities > restrictions, this is the best chance of getting things right. More and better emblems drop from players with higher AAO, more emblems in bags for defending keep/zones with AAO. Just plain rp is not enough, for you can get it elsewhere.

[tazdingo]

snip

it's less that people finding zerging itself desirable, it's that they just want to fight, and zerging is the most reliable way to do that. that's why it's so difficult to pull people away from wc fights to do objectives - the objectives were simply a means to an end, a way to ensure that they get a big fight at the one spot everyone is guaranteed to be heading to

i'm all for encouraging people to spread over zones, just no "you can't fly here right now." i've mentioned ordnance a number of times as sort of supply box "fragments" - a player could carry and turn in an unlimited amount but they decayed like boxes, each giving less than a box. you'd probably have to skew it so that the player rewards scaled better than keep ranking vs. boxes - something like 1/4 of the renown/exp for the player but 1/16 of the contribution to keep stars

this creates something for casuals and pubs to do, as they have a super reliable way of getting some renown alongside helping them learn the map, alongside creating food for roamers as they could go to the less populated zones, avoid the zerg and hunt down ordnance carries, gaining bonus renown for recovered ordnance from killed player just like boxes

[provide]

snip

snap

I mean, in theory I agree with your point and I thought the same myself for a long time but in my opinion there comes a point where incentivizing failed and other options have to be considered. Soft restricting zones is the best option imo. People will always take the easy route and keep zerging even if there are other options that give better rewards.

[Garamore]

Just logged in. Its EU prime time.