Buran wrote:
i saw yesterday how they got up keep rank holding 3 BOs.
2. From the 4th to 5th stars of the keep, progress should go only from holding 4 BOs, at 3 BOs stop, at 2 BOs go down.
You've seen wrong. Check patch notes:
- To rank keep to rank 1 or 2 you need at least 2 BOs.
- To rank keep to rank 3 or 4 you need at least 3 BOs.
- To rank keep to rank 5 you need at least 4 BOs.
Buran wrote:
3. In my opinion, the situation of the lock zone then with 5stars keep, if the AAO > (for example, or make proportion for different people rare in the zone) 80% is incorrect and the capture of the zone must include taking keep with bloking star rank progress at 4stars. While AAO become less then 80%. It is saved from xrealm effect for defenders.
This is in place to avoid 'come at me bro' 'strategy' - turtling 200 ppl in keep and pissing at the rest of the map.
So you mean on previous system waiting for rank 0 and no AAO was strategy ?
No, previous system was taktically, but defenders had a chance to break the lock zone for attakers - if they are able to defend keep. New system allow not to do this. I do not know what is the best RvR systeam was in RoR, but with every changes I see less cases to reverse the situation for those who have lost keep.
In ORvR means OPEN realm versus realm. According this, the number between 2 factions could be not balanced. Is that system related?
I believe that the conditions for capturing the zone must take into account the proportions of the players in the zone quantitatively or in percent. Because losing 24 to 100 and 24 to 200 is not the same thing. Otherwise, the ease of winning stimulates unwillingness to hard fight and xrealmers.
This is in place to avoid 'come at me bro' 'strategy' - turtling 200 ppl in keep and pissing at the rest of the map.
turtling was last chance to save the zone. U broke this, but u dont give anything else. As i wrote - now zone locks are easy then before. I understand u, but i do not know - why do u dislike defenders so much?
This is in place to avoid 'come at me bro' 'strategy' - turtling 200 ppl in keep and pissing at the rest of the map.
turtling was last chance to save the zone. U broke this, but u dont give anything else. As i wrote - now zone locks are easy then before. I understand u, but i do not know - why do u dislike defenders so much?
You sitll can turtle, just got another objective - hold one of the BOs. And it's not about disliking the defenders much or otherwise - if you see oponent that stopped sieging your keep and is gaining ranks on their keeps send some people outside and cap BOs for counterplay. Waithammer is no more.
2Hargrim:
for example: 100people vs 50people.
1st situation. attakers could use 1 WB to defend 4 BOs, and go to attak keep. If defenders want to save keep - they must be all at keep, but they lost the zone. If they split 1 WB at def and 1 WB to cheking BOs yes, they have a chance to retake BOs, but they loosing the keep. 2 WBs vs 4 WBs is not anouth to hold 2 BOs
2nd situation. attakers could hold 4 BOs - for each WB in each BO, yes it is possible to hold 3, but 1 can hold the defenders. And we got situation 4 star keep with 3 BOs vs 3 star keep with 1 BO. Then become the 1st situation.
what is why my opinion is - The conditions of the zone lock must depend on the ratio of the players in the zone. Else RvR become too easy for attakers than AAO >100%. I am talking about little chance for defenders to save zone, because new RvR made some situation when protecting zone become impossible and not depends frome wish and actions players. I am talking only about this.
Buran wrote:2Hargrim:
for example: 100people vs 50people.
1st situation. attakers could use 1 WB to defend 4 BOs, and go to attak keep. If defenders want to save keep - they must be all at keep, but they lost the zone. If they split 1 WB at def and 1 WB to cheking BOs yes, they have a chance to retake BOs, but they loosing the keep. 2 WBs vs 4 WBs is not anouth to hold 2 BOs
2nd situation. attakers could hold 4 BOs - for each WB in each BO, yes it is possible to hold 3, but 1 can hold the defenders. And we got situation 4 star keep with 3 BOs vs 3 star keep with 1 BO. Then become the 1st situation.
what is why my opinion is - The conditions of the zone lock must depend on the ratio of the players in the zone. Else RvR become too easy for attakers than AAO >100%. I am talking about little chance for defenders to save zone, because new RvR made some situation when protecting zone become impossible and not depends frome wish and actions players. I am talking only about this.
In a 100 v 50 situation, why would you ever expect the side with 50 to have a chance at winning the zone? You have a chance to spoil the victory of the larger realm by forcing a draw, but that's the best you're going to get. Keep in mind, both sides are supposed to roll for bags during a draw, you just don't have the battlefront advance for your side.
If you're seriously beating around the bush asking that players outnumbered 2:1 have a significant chance to WIN a zone, I'm not sure there's anything we can do for you. That's silly.
Buran wrote:2Hargrim:
for example: 100people vs 50people.
1st situation. attakers could use 1 WB to defend 4 BOs, and go to attak keep. If defenders want to save keep - they must be all at keep, but they lost the zone. If they split 1 WB at def and 1 WB to cheking BOs yes, they have a chance to retake BOs, but they loosing the keep. 2 WBs vs 4 WBs is not anouth to hold 2 BOs
2nd situation. attakers could hold 4 BOs - for each WB in each BO, yes it is possible to hold 3, but 1 can hold the defenders. And we got situation 4 star keep with 3 BOs vs 3 star keep with 1 BO. Then become the 1st situation.
what is why my opinion is - The conditions of the zone lock must depend on the ratio of the players in the zone. Else RvR become too easy for attakers than AAO >100%. I am talking about little chance for defenders to save zone, because new RvR made some situation when protecting zone become impossible and not depends frome wish and actions players. I am talking only about this.
In a 100 v 50 situation, why would you ever expect the side with 50 to have a chance at winning the zone? You have a chance to spoil the victory of the larger realm by forcing a draw, but that's the best you're going to get. Keep in mind, both sides are supposed to roll for bags during a draw, you just don't have the battlefront advance for your side.
If you're seriously beating around the bush asking that players outnumbered 2:1 have a significant chance to WIN a zone, I'm not sure there's anything we can do for you. That's silly.
1. You ascribe to me what I did not say. My speech was that the defenders should have a chance to defend a zone, and you attribute to me the desire to win the majority in the minority. Victory is the lock of the zone. Zone Capture runs on clear conditions, if the conditions are met, the victory comes, otherwise not.
2. I am talking about that new system make RvR easy. It is means that future of RvR zone depends on the ratio of the players in the zone frome What is why in the future RvR become less interesting and promote xrealmers. U wrote that u like this.
3. I wrote about chat only who has status WB and party leade. U told nothing about this.
social being determines consciousness. U make the situation where RvR are easy for the players, just for fun. but this is in conflict with the spirit of the warhammer, which consists of exaltation, pathos, heroics. But this is all that love for Warhammer!!! Please, save it.
I want ask about rvr system, is it still campaign system, from t2 to t4? or it is total chaos now? all random?
coz lats time Avelorn was locked, and rvr should go to DW, but no, DW not active
KV was locked, but we have again dwafr t2 open
1200 on a server and only 2 zones active
this is something wrong
so is it intended or it is bugged?
Buran wrote:1. You ascribe to me what I did not say. My speech was that the defenders should have a chance to defend a zone, and you attribute to me the desire to win the majority in the minority. Victory is the lock of the zone. Zone Capture runs on clear conditions, if the conditions are met, the victory comes, otherwise not.
2. I am talking about that new system make RvR easy. It is means that future of RvR zone depends on the ratio of the players in the zone frome What is why in the future RvR become less interesting and promote xrealmers. U wrote that u like this.
3. I wrote about chat only who has status WB and party leade. U told nothing about this.
social being determines consciousness. U make the situation where RvR are easy for the players, just for fun. but this is in conflict with the spirit of the warhammer, which consists of exaltation, pathos, heroics. But this is all that love for Warhammer!!! Please, save it.
1. What the 'defend' mean? Maybe tell us what that is. You currently can and previously you couldn't - there is a timer that makes everyone lose after 4 hours of trading blows.
2. It always did depend on the ratio. Nothing changed.
3. Nobody mentioned anything about it because nobody have anything to say about it. From my POV that might be good ide, but not implemented yet and doesn't really matter in this discussion.
