RVR Weekly Event - adjust contribution for tasks?

[Omegus]

I have started going the RVR weekly event. Out of the four tasks I have fully completed two tasks and have partially completed a third, but I have not earned enough influence for the first tier of rewards. It seems the player kills and objectives give little to no influence, with most of the influence locked behind forts and keeps.

Would you consider adjusting how much influence each task gives to ensure a more even distribution? I personally have no issue with the Soulstone talisman needing all of the rewards, but I believe the progress below should at least earn you the first reward. Fortresses are important, but in terms of this live event's influence bar they are probably a little bit too important.



Thank you for reading.

[Omegus]

Third keep captured, still not got the first influence reward.

[Rubius]

+1 from my side!

[Fenris78]

same, I get the incitation for fortress fights, but weighting them 20% of total progression EACH looks like a bit overboard...

Make fortresses about 10-11% each, to make sure we can go to at least second step, even if we dont get the chance to participate (and/or succeed) to fort taking ; keep in mind fortresses got limited spots, and are going for a limited time too, meaning they are way harder to complete than any other task, and can even be impossible to do (constant stalemating without pushes to fort zones, odd timezone that prevents you to participate, etc.).

Currently every other task can be "casually" completed in RvR. Make it so "casual" players can complete 2/3 steps, since stalwart soulstone is clearly cherry on the top and not especially meant to be gained this easily.

[tvbrowntown]

150 enemies should be 25% tbh cause it is such a large time investment.

[Omegus]

Update: increase from 3rd keep to 4th keep was much bigger than 2nd keep to 3rd keep. I wonder if the influence per pip has been set incorrectly rather than the influence per task being wrong? Seems weird that I would get a speed-up towards the 2nd pip as that is typically where it slows down.

[Omegus]

After the recent patch which changed the number of tasks needed to get to the 1st and 2nd reward, it still requires forts to get the 2nd reward:



Any chance of one final tweak so 3/4 tasks (with 0/3 forts) still grants the 2nd reward? This is still a substantial time investment but is less reliant on the state of the overall campaign, timezones, etc. To win the fort, you not only need to be online for the fort but get enough contribution in the previous zone to get entry to the fort. And then you know, actually win the fort.

I have seen some other suggestions asking if participation in forts could count. Personally I am against this as I feel it's one step closer to encouraging throwers. I just feel it's much fairer if the 2nd reward didn't need forts, as taking/defending 5 keeps, getting 10 BOs and killing 150 people to get the event slot item takes a comparable amount of time to how long it takes to fully complete the weekend warfront scenario for that event slot item.

[Aethilmar]

I have seen some other suggestions asking if participation in forts could count. Personally I am against this as I feel it's one step closer to encouraging throwers. I just feel it's much fairer if the 2nd reward didn't need forts, as taking/defending 5 keeps, getting 10 BOs and killing 150 people to get the event slot item takes a comparable amount of time to how long it takes to fully complete the weekend warfront scenario for that event slot item.

So how exactly is "throwing" (an imprecise term that means anything from afk to I didn't think you fought as hard as your should have) a zone different than stacking a zone so the other side has no chance and it is fundamentally PvD with the occasional fight of a warband running over a group?

The people who fight on the losing side are doing so for your entertainment and allow you to get your kill quest if nothing else. But, hey, lets make it easier for the zerg side to get their extra rewards while doing exactly nothing to encourage the outnumbered side to fight. Sounds like a long term strategy for success to me.

You want your PvD rewards, earn them.

[diedrake]

Imo getting everything minus the 3 fort successes ( takes or defends) should net ya at least 2 blips. 150 kills though if in a guild rvr event is completed relitivly quickly. If devs dont wish to change it so everything done w-o the forts is 2 blips, mabe increase kills for the week to 200 or 250 to get that 2nd blip.

Forts i agree suck when losing side has no chance. But its rvr, which isnt designed to be 100% fair. That and its also a player issue in a way as nothing is stopping players from logging losing side besides " i dont want to get farmed". If i chose order i would be right w yall. For me though only time id switch sides is if guild made choice to move perminently.

[Omegus]

I have seen some other suggestions asking if participation in forts could count. Personally I am against this as I feel it's one step closer to encouraging throwers. I just feel it's much fairer if the 2nd reward didn't need forts, as taking/defending 5 keeps, getting 10 BOs and killing 150 people to get the event slot item takes a comparable amount of time to how long it takes to fully complete the weekend warfront scenario for that event slot item.

So how exactly is "throwing" (an imprecise term that means anything from afk to I didn't think you fought as hard as your should have) a zone different than stacking a zone so the other side has no chance and it is fundamentally PvD with the occasional fight of a warband running over a group?

The people who fight on the losing side are doing so for your entertainment and allow you to get your kill quest if nothing else. But, hey, lets make it easier for the zerg side to get their extra rewards while doing exactly nothing to encourage the outnumbered side to fight. Sounds like a long term strategy for success to me.

You want your PvD rewards, earn them.

I have no idea what you're on about or why this is aimed at me? I was defending in the Fell Landing siege earlier and although disorganised (1.5 - 2 organised WBs defending? rest were rabble), everyone was trying their hardest to win the defense which was a good thing. Both sides had a queue so there was no zerg stacking. I want both sides fighting to win to be a thing that is encouraged, not to get into the fort and then decide "**** it, I'm getting progress on the event regardless" and then throw.

We already know what happens when losing leads to rewards from the past 2 years of fort defenses being thrown to unlock cities.

Please aim your tired rhetoric at someone else. I play one side, win or lose.