improving the general RvR-system - not just my two cents

[gebajger]

I like this proposal, i think it would be the right direction.
The presence of the NPCs, (the keep lord) definitely contributes to the zerging.
The removal of the Bo lockout would allow 'ninjas' to actually do something to prevent (or delay) keep takes.
No bonus around BOs...good.

The only thing I would possibly change with the increasing population is to have more than 1 zone open

[satori]

If you force all players into 1 zone they are gonna flock together. strength and rewards in numbers.

maybe you should read the rest of my post

if they stay together they won't be able to take a keep in this system

Maybe you should stop assuming I didn't.

The fact of the matter is that I did, and what you are saying wasn't clear at all. All you said was that the damage on the door was "fixed".

And even if that's the case, it doesn't change anything. Everyone who sees that the keep is under attack is gonna want a piece of the cake in terms of rewards.

You said you wanted constructive critism. There, you have it.

well first thing: i am sorry, i was really tired when i answered and did not mean to get rude :/ i hope you can forgive me!

on topic:
zerging in 1 huge ball is not an option because of the BOs, you cannot damage the keep door at all if there is even a single enemy player in the zone taking them back while the zerg is at the keep, so you need to split up

the reward wasn't clear 100% in my first post so let me explain what i meant: the keep-take itself locks the zone but does NOT give a reward, the reward (lock-tick) comes to everyone in the zone when it is flipped, you don't have to be near the keep, so even if you guarded a BO or cut off supply lines for the entire time and contributed that way you will get the full reward

i hope that explains it better

[satori]

I think some ppl kind of take the whole NPC thing too seriously as it really doesn't have a huge impact on things but they do set the minimum requirements to take a BO. You could say that also just clicking on a BO is a bad design because just doing that with a single player is a dumbed down game mechanic.
It really doesn't matter what way to go (with/without NPC) because each system can completely succeed or fail because of other issues.. But one way I look at them is like like how live events have simple NPC which simply guide you to certain areas, much like how Renwons is gained from Flag caps. I don't think the NPC should be acting like the NPC in the PvE areas at all!! NO
If the NPC are in the RvR then give them a different behavior - no pve spec required and no real pathing like in PvE zone so the whole tanking thing is not mandatory.
This is easy to accomplish - NPC fulfill their role more like story elements more like the Warlords in the city. The NPC to do something like automatic Ram-the-door, automatic healing assist for underdogs defense...
Keep lords - keep them but change the behavior to be new and not like old... When there is more construction behind some RvR things like Keep takes I think it will be better than having all things just flags to tap.

on removing the guards: yes you are right, it does set the minimum requirements to take a BO (and reduces the time to do so) and that is exactly what i wanted it to do
this way even a single player - no matter what class or how he is specced - can take a BO that is not defended by enemy players, i am pretty sure this will lead to actual PvP

on your idea with the NPC:
1) sounds like an interesting thought and it would be fun to see that happening but i personally really dislike any NPC in the PvP zone, the only thing you should be able to kill in there should be other players, not some NPC (connected to an objective or not), so what i was trying to propose is a RvR-system without NPCs at all
2) the devs would have to put in a lot of work to get the scripting done if you want the NPCs to run from A to B and maybe let them do something there under certain conditions...

[Khorba]

Delete medalion add warchest!

[Tesq]

this wont fix the same and always present problem, total side zerg :/

if the zerg is total side other relam cannot do nothing.

Also it's wortheless have more than 2 flag require to atatck door, zerg can simply split in 2 and not in 4 to def flags.

Zerg need an aao that reduces his renow taken not just split it...

[satori]

What stops both sides from taking 2 BO and attacking the enemy keep, while hoping to be faster than the other side?

this would mean both sides have almost the same number of players in the zone (cause you said they both need 2 BOs) and in this case you could pose the same question in the current RvR-system

tbh the short answer is: nothing stops them!
but: if even one player caps an undefended BO in your example the balance is completly gone and the enemy side will probably loose the race to take the keep (and you know... there will always be that one annoying player!)

In fully loop-sided situation and no BO lock timers, the underdog can never hold a BO. You might interrupt the siege for a few minutes or seconds, as long as it takes to recap the BO.

but no lock timer also means that you can take the any BO over and over again to interrupt the siege...

- imagine an order zerg like we have seen it in T2 on RoR but in proposed system: they zerg every BO in the zone and then the converge at the keep and start taking it, this will take some time cause of the maximum damage you can deal to the keep door
- now imagine the underdog (let us say 2-3 shamans) running around and taking every undefended BO they can find...
it is going to drive the zerg so mad (cause if destro is the underdog by that much order would need 4 BOs to damage the door) that they would put maybe a full group of players on every BO and the rest keeps hitting the keep
- now imagine all those destro players sitting in the warcamp and guarding the mailbox: if they notice that the order zerg is plit up by that much i think there is a really strong incentive to group up, and even if you only get 1,5 - 2 groups you can easily halt the keep siege by taking a BO back after killing the order group there (and hey: now we have actual PvP!)
- in the same example you can also start attacking the order keep as long as they are still trying to get back their BOs because as the extreme underdog you won't need BOs to attack the keep

[satori]

lot of wrong idea, pls look other rvr topics.

please tell me what ideas are wrong and why

for melee is boring

no it is not because now you can actually do something: guard a BO and fight there on even ground vs the enemy rather than get shot by ranged classes standing inside a keep - this sounds way more boring!

[satori]

The only thing I would possibly change with the increasing population is to have more than 1 zone open

yea that was a point i wasn't sure about at all... i am really split on the idea of having more than one zone open at a time, i will try to make a pro/con list when i got more time

[navis]

on removing the guards: yes you are right, it does set the minimum requirements to take a BO (and reduces the time to do so) and that is exactly what i wanted it to do
this way even a single player - no matter what class or how he is specced - can take a BO that is not defended by enemy players, i am pretty sure this will lead to actual PvP

What I am getting at is that the minimum requirement of only 1 person to cap a flag is not a good design because it is on the opposite spectrum of the zerg. No happy medium. One person is too little and it encourages solo and small group play but not the warband sized gameplay, which is what this game is all about.

It's not that I don't want solo players doing anything, because I do, but I don't want solo players going to cap BO's by themselves. This game is not all about skirmishing and it is not all about ganking, only partly about those. The rest of this games primary action should be group vs group.

So, I proposed by BO 2.0 suggestions here and this attempts to improve BO to be less 'cap-and-run' and more of something that increases fortification as you hold it, gives benefit to underdog, etc. http://www.returnofreckoning.com/forum/ ... =15&t=6694

[satori]

this wont fix the same and always present problem, total side zerg :/

if the zerg is total side other relam cannot do nothing.

i'm pretty sure i never saw a system better suited against uneven odds, so if you have a better idea on how to solve that problem PLEASE tell us
for an example of how the system can work in the case of extreme unbalance read this post: http://www.returnofreckoning.com/forum/ ... =10#p75160

Also it's wortheless have more than 2 flag require to atatck door, zerg can simply split in 2 and not in 4 to def flags.

i don't really get what you are saying here, i hope that answer fits you concern:
in case of extreme realm-unbalance it is in fact good to make it harder to take the keep for the zerging side (read: to make them hold more BOs)

Zerg need an aao that reduces his renow taken not just split it...

so instead of the AAO like it was on live you propose a kind of negative AAO for the zerging side? interesting idea! that would pretty much force the zerging side to X-realm and balance out the population because they would not get any renown while staring down the keep door / PvDoor IF (and only if) this negative AAO also effects the keep- and lock-rewards
but that would mean that the underdog can simply stay in their warcamp to prevent any RR-gains by the zerging side :/
so i am more a fan of the positive AAO like it was on live