[POLL] What RvR system did you enjoy the most?

[saupreusse]

a lot of people, who dont think that pve should count in vp, still voted for 1.0.
(like me). I did it because i liked 1.0 but it needs some adjustments to get it working.
and saying that people who voted for 1.0 dont have a clue about the game and dont play rvr is simply stoopid bashing.

[Razid1987]

There are clearly many options, and disagreements. But as Eiger has said, I don't think it's something to talk about on a forum. Many suggestions work in theory.
I suggest we try all the good ones, each for a few weeks, and then maybe to a vote with the entire community afterwards? You could maybe even make it so people rank the systems on a scale on how good people thought they were?

saying that people who voted for 1.0 dont have a clue about the game and dont play rvr is simply stoopid bashing.

I agree. If someone disagrees with you, doesn't mean they are drooling morons. Might very well be that they have thought of something, or experienced something, you haven't.

The Internet - Blaming everything on stupidity since the 1990s.

[Pi3b0y]

I would love VP once they have all public quests working smoothly, carriers were interesting as well. But I must give credit to the 3x BO capture to unlock keep, it adds an interesting element to the game in a sense that you can prevent a realm from capturing a zone even if you are vastly outnumbered.

[peterthepan3]

Scenarios pertinent to zone in question (Caledor Woods for Caledor, Battle for Praag for Praag) should contribute to zone locks (even if a small %) no idea why that was ever changed.

[Nameless]

Scenarios pertinent to zone in question (Caledor Woods for Caledor, Battle for Praag for Praag) should contribute to zone locks (even if a small %) no idea why that was ever changed.

cos you can block lock by not participating.
That was the issue with the old system which was faaar from perfect and ppl like it cos the game back then had different atmosphere, not becouse it was better that the systems after.
Everything were new, realm pride, week or two just to log a single zone! Much more romatic times than the grindfest at the end

Whole orvr should be reworked and devs should take all the good from all systems not just copy one since they all failed anyway

[peterthepan3]

But it allowed lolelite6men to contribute somewhat considerably, which was nice.

[magter3001]

Scenarios pertinent to zone in question (Caledor Woods for Caledor, Battle for Praag for Praag) should contribute to zone locks (even if a small %) no idea why that was ever changed.

cos you can block lock by not participating.
That was the issue with the old system which was faaar from perfect and ppl like it cos the game back then had different atmosphere, not becouse it was better that the systems after.
Everything were new, realm pride, week or two just to log a single zone! Much more romatic times than the grindfest at the end

Whole orvr should be reworked and devs should take all the good from all systems not just copy one since they all failed anyway

Wrong...

Old system had a system in place that if the opposition didn't queue up, you would get VP points for a 500-0 scenario win even if there was no pop. There was a problem however when one side, the one that zerged, would call for everyone to queue up on the realm and due to overqueueing and the other side not having enough people queueing to match, the mass queue side would get a buttload of scenario VP points. That can easily be fixed by the devs here though, I'm sure.

EDIT:

Another thing I remember though is, if our realm got zerged... some gleaders and realm leaders would tell people not to queue so that we can focus on turning the tide in Orvr as we needed every man... we would queue up and then leave queue every single time while we fought for objectives or keeps. This would keep good 6-12 mans fighting against ghosts while keeping the good players out of orvr for us. Clearly the system has it's flaws.

[Nameless]

But it allowed lolelite6men to contribute somewhat considerably, which was nice.

remove BO locking time make requirement to have at least 3 BOs to have keep door attackable and voala you will have important roles from small parties that like to go, strike and back up.
While the orvr system is keep centric only the bigger zerg will prevail, disperse ppl around the zone and you wont need to farm scs to feel that you had contribution for the lock

[Tesq]

pve lock would never work, once you have end gear or even before there is no point to keep farm pq....

you are just farming pq.....

there is nothing fun or even challenging...and so no reward should be involved.

sc + rvr is a thing.... pvp+pve is another; keep pve out of pvp we alredy have to deal with empty keep farm and someone want to revive pq farm?

also this is exatly another way to block the lock....loosing faction farm pq and never let vp lock happen once every some min they zerg 1 flag and blockl the lock for x min ---> then repeat.

sc VPs--> only for underdogs
pve--> out of rvr

[Tesq]

But it allowed lolelite6men to contribute somewhat considerably, which was nice.

remove BO locking time make requirement to have at least 3 BOs to have keep door attackable and voala you will have important roles from small parties that like to go, strike and back up.
While the orvr system is keep centric only the bigger zerg will prevail, disperse ppl around the zone and you wont need to farm scs to feel that you had contribution for the lock

disperse ppl around and this is not an army game anymore

think out of the classis rvr lock meccanic

relics
resusrce system


there are tons of additional things that can be implemented while keep the rvr army centered which is why the game was cool; the game was designed for big fights. Or you would have not so many big empty rvr lake to fill with something.