Changelog 31/10/16

[StormX2]

Sorry 'bout the rats. I figured there are some settings that allow us to tweak the name above character heads and remain targetable, but I set the settings for untargetable/no-name instead. Cheer up lads, you can still AoE the filthy suckers :^)

Glad to hear it! Those dirty rats have to pay!

[Olszewski]

Thank you for the Mourkain Temple fix. Will check it out tonight. One of my fav SC's. Shame on both order and destro taking the part back to spawn and making the part untakable using aoe cannons and range classes sitting in spawn location to get a win

[Azarael]

I am not getting something How keep de-ranking will slow you down?

Lets assume that I had a keep at lvl 1 and deployed 1-2 cannons. Yes, I will not be able to deploy any more cannons, but I still will be able to attack enemy keep, regardless of my BO possession, even if my keep drops to 0? Only problem which attacker will have are groups caring resources to the keep to heal the door, but with zerg it can be easily solved as postern are not very far from the main gate.

I think the reason you weren't seeing my intent is because keep sieges in the first version did not perform as I wished them to.

If your keep deranks, your supply caps lower, meaning you can field fewer cannons/rams. Now, if I've calibrated it better in this patch, keep sieges may weaken or fail if not enough cannons are brought to bring the door down before the defense destroys them all, or if the defense destroys cannons that are en route to the keep, as the players returning resources via posterns will be repairing the keep door by about 20-25% per return, providing a regen factor that the attack will need to break, either through overwhelming force on the door or through preventing resource returns. In the first iteration, the losing realm was getting shut out of the map by the high lock timers, lack of means of retaliating against a zerg and complete lack of pressure capability against attacks on the front door of a rank 0 keep, meaning that the attack had no trouble whatsoever taking the keep.

[wiscel]

Nice one again. I'm wondering what's next on the dev's agenda. Warlord/Invader gear, fortresses, city siege or Lost Vale/Bastion Stairs, just curious

[Razielhell]

Nice one again. I'm wondering what's next on the dev's agenda. Warlord/Invader gear, fortresses, city siege or Lost Vale/Bastion Stairs, just curious

Read latest Dev Diary here.

[Akalukz]

Glad to see an active approach to tweaking the keep sieges. I like the new stuff, just need to slow the keep takes, this seems to be a step in the correct path.

[wiscel]

Nice one again. I'm wondering what's next on the dev's agenda. Warlord/Invader gear, fortresses, city siege or Lost Vale/Bastion Stairs, just curious

Read latest Dev Diary here.

That's an old one

[Razielhell]

No.What do you expect? Dev Diary every month?
This is an old one.

[sabat80]

I think the reason you weren't seeing my intent is because keep sieges in the first version did not perform as I wished them to.

If your keep deranks, your supply caps lower, meaning you can field fewer cannons/rams. Now, if I've calibrated it better in this patch, keep sieges may weaken or fail if not enough cannons are brought to bring the door down before the defense destroys them all, or if the defense destroys cannons that are en route to the keep, as the players returning resources via posterns will be repairing the keep door by about 20-25% per return, providing a regen factor that the attack will need to break, either through overwhelming force on the door or through preventing resource returns. In the first iteration, the losing realm was getting shut out of the map by the high lock timers, lack of means of retaliating against a zerg and complete lack of pressure capability against attacks on the front door of a rank 0 keep, meaning that the attack had no trouble whatsoever taking the keep.

Fantastic, all clear now! Thanks a lot!

[mynie]

Enforce a requirement of having 3 BOs to be able to attack the keep (previous way).
In that way you are forcing the zerg to split as they need to guard BO’s and carry on taking resources to the keep to be able to attack. With only 1 zone active at any given time it will make people to fight and do things in a whole zone instead of swarming keeps one by one.

If i may add something: i think BO/Keep Guard NPC should go away (they were actually gone in 1.4). If you want to allow people to actually do something out of the zerg, and allow more dynamic domination mechanics, it seems to be mandatory. The BO capture timer is already long enough.
Anyone should be able to take an undefended BO. BO should be defended, Zerg should not be allowed to focus on 1 BO at a time, they should split, defend, and fight, or it should just lose to skirmish tactics.

Another thing is: the carrot
Sadly, players need a better carrot to stay in RvR lakes. At the moment, at the first difficulty, they just leave for SC or to zerg with the winning side. SC as they are way more rewarding than the RvR currently is. You should bring back better cap/defense ticks on both BO and Keep, or give players something they want, more tokens, more gold, or any incitative you can think about anything that would help them thinking that RvR fight is still worth it, despite difficulties, compared to alternatives.