Scenarios

[Everdin]

on my +80rr sov geared char its incredibly easy to get a great group going, that wins +90% of scenarios. sadly, its not fun stomping scenarios without a challenge.

if i switch to my new rr43 char its infinitely harder for me to get a strong group going. sadly, its not fun getting stomped in scenarios without a chance.

in both situations its me: the same person with the same in-game contacts, same skill and same mindset, but the results vary enormously.
sure there should be a difference, but should it be that big?
or to ask the right question:
is it fun for you guys having 60-70% games, that are either stomp or get stomped?
dont you prefer a good challenge, in which you dont know the outcome after 1-2mins?

We are usually 3-4 people, if odds are bad, we arefilling up with people from /5, as far as I know we never ask the rr, but you can bet, if the guys don't do their job despite all explanations, we will think twice if we invite them again.

[Speedyluck]

on my +80rr sov geared char its incredibly easy to get a great group going, that wins +90% of scenarios. sadly, its not fun stomping scenarios without a challenge.

if i switch to my new rr43 char its infinitely harder for me to get a strong group going. sadly, its not fun getting stomped in scenarios without a chance.

in both situations its me: the same person with the same in-game contacts, same skill and same mindset, but the results vary enormously.
sure there should be a difference, but should it be that big?
or to ask the right question:
is it fun for you guys having 60-70% games, that are either stomp or get stomped?
dont you prefer a good challenge, in which you dont know the outcome after 1-2mins?

you are automatically being labeled as unskilled, refuse to learn, not worthy type of players.

[ShadowWar]

Why not bring back guards that insta-gib anyone who goes too deep into enemy camp. Or make the siege weapons actually kill people - make scenario only single target siege weapons two shot anyone, even tanks, to encourage playing objectives and not trying to camp for kills.

The entire situation has been turned to 11 because this event REQUIRES players into SCs, at least some, just to get the first reward. I love SCs, even if most people I play with do not, but the current state is miserable, and I don't know who is driving it, or what their reasoning is.

[Aethilmar]

The philosophy for scenarios on live was mostly about completing objectives with the idea being you could still win the scenario if the other team decided to just farm kills instead. There were even some scenarios where if the opposition didn't split up a bit they would lose every time.

Here they have slowly but surely changed the scenarios such that you always have to face the opposition head on with your six versus their six.

The true irony is the very name of "scenarios" implies different situations to try out. However most every move they have made in their current stewardship of the game has been to make them all the same. Talk about missing the point ...

[tazdingo]

one solution i've never seen put forward is bigger scs...

more players = much less chance that 1 or 2 prems will completely stomp it, but those same prems still get rewarded for organizing

prime time can absolutely fill 6 groups on each side in t4

[Culexus]

It boggles my mind that the team is spending time adding barriers and removing guards to try and fix a problem that never existed in the first place. Scenarios were fine as they were on live, all they need is a proper matchmaking system.

As many others have pointed out, these changes are only good for enabling the stronger side to farm the weaker side. It feels bad for the losing side knowing you're only there to provide renown to others, and unless you're a toxic ahole, feels bad for the stronger side as you know the other team is being forced into your meatgrinder with no way of fighting back.

Revert scs back to how they were on live but with a proper matching tool and queue system. Then scs can be considered finished and the team can move on to other things rather than forever trying to fix a self created problem.

[RaginPower]

The one healthy thing they could do is use the ranked soloq system's cross faction setup. Make events soloq and balance the scenarios by archetypes. So both sides have the same number of healers, tanks, mdps, rdps

[Alhazredd]

All this change did was enforce feeding and it results in less SC pops as most people would rather take a 10min debuff than get farmed

[Diapazon]

remove the guards on the scenarios, they interfere with farming, they are confusing, why are they behind the barrier, they do not attack.

[Kylashandra]

As some said above, SCs on RoR and on live are two very different things... And I strongly despise what they have become on RoR.

1 - Objectives : On live, there was a variety of objectives in SCs, and many ways to win a SC. On RoR, it has been made to brute force fights by locking out caped objectives, removing the capture time on most objectives which forced people to move with a flag/objective holder to ensure cap. Everything is made to be blob friendly, as it is in open Rvr.

2 - Warcamp protection : adding barriers and removing guards is virtually preventing any form of come back for the dominated side. Guards and no barrier allowed some fight around the warcamp, with healers being able to heal from a relative safety against overly stronger teams and it even sometimes allowed come back thanks to a good guard aggro. Barriers just prevent any form of comeback since you can be virtually camped at your respawn.

3 - New SCs : they rely on the blob-friendly philosophy being mostly small arenas with 3 flags/objectives. They bring nothing new except for a new scenery and would need some twists to be enjoyable (maybe making them into 6v6 Scs).

4 - SC numbers : SCs were fun and a good way to enjoy small scale fights being mostly 12v12 or 6v6 on live, with a few exceptions (Battle for Praag, Dragon's Bane and Reikland hills which were 18v18). Most of the SCs nowadays are Warband sized, which once again kills the fun for small scale enjoyers.

5 - SC Class Balance : as said above, there is basically no Matchmaking in SCs and it would be hard to balance anyway, because there will mostly always be more DPS queuing. However, I think that SCs should not be able to start without a minimum amount of healers / tanks on each side.

6 - SCs filling up on the go : New groups / people suddenly joining an on-going SC is bad in my opinion. Not only it most always guarantee a wipe for the team that pushed towards the opponent's camp (their reinforcements arriving way later), but it also makes no sense having people spawning in a SC that is already over. Wait for the SC to fill before it starts, and lock it up, just launch a new one with the newly queued people.

7 - High level queue : On live, they added a high RR queue around the end of the live service and it really helped the newly 40s to enjoy SCs.

8 - SCs rewards : The sole reason why there are still people running SCs given their current condition is weekly events / Live events which force SCs into life, and die-hard SCs fans like me who will still run them throughout the week. The reason is, despite all the previous point discussed, there is also no appeal to SCs nowadays outside of events. Previously SCs were the only way to get the best weapons in game, through the SC currenty. Now that it has been removed and all the currencies unified, there is just nothing rewarding in SCs outside of the events windows. Even RR obtained in SCs is pretty low, unless you run a premade and manage to farm alot of kills in a single SC. Bringing back some sort of reward exclusive to SCs would help those who want to run them throughout the week to find a more diverse cast in their games, and not the same 6/12 people.