make City's 36 vs 36. 1 Warband vs 1 Warband then fill up the 12 remaining players with Solo/Duo que's. This would be easiest and most interesting results because its hard to manipulate the que when its 1wb vs 1 wb + 12 Solos with the Guilds and the Coordinated ones : D
But nope
City should be redesigned
- Sinisterror
- Posts: 1129
Re: City should be redesigned
"To clarify, me asking to developers to go test their own changes is not sign of toxicity or anger, but a sign of hope that the people punching in the numbers remain aware of potential consequences and test their own changes"-Teefz
Ads
Re: City should be redesigned
Cities should stop beeing separate scenarios imo. instead every open city instance should generate victory points (like the original stage 1 city). This way you can win even if you lose your instance and it would be worth fighting a losing instance to generate vps for the realm. The vps could be hidden until conclusion to prevent losing side from leaving. Rewards should be split between the instance and the city siege as a whole.Everdin wrote: Wed Nov 20, 2024 9:47 am In general, I did not want to talk if there should be a city or not, thread focused more on the question what happens im people leave, there should be fillup mechanics, more motivations before to stay. Atm staying in feels like you get punished because others left
Nekkma / Hjortron
Zatakk
Smultron
Zatakk
Smultron
-
- Posts: 199
Re: City should be redesigned
Hard to see how to implement smartly, or would be tough at least. Like you can end up with instances where you just get spawn camped and cannot really generate any vp at that point. If in the old way people could swap instances like invite premades in to match other premades it might work. But then how do you calculate rewards, is it when it all ends and everyone in all instances get them? What if people "swapping" instances for better match up might not get back in, this would create sort of "I am not leaving, might get rewards" -mentality with danger of losing said rewards. What if no opposition? Empty instances? Only some of the realm that can fit in get rewards? Those are questions that pop in my mind straight off top of my head.Nekkma wrote: Thu Nov 21, 2024 7:05 am Cities should stop beeing separate scenarios imo. instead every open city instance should generate victory points (like the original stage 1 city). This way you can win even if you lose your instance and it would be worth fighting a losing instance to generate vps for the realm. The vps could be hidden until conclusion to prevent losing side from leaving. Rewards should be split between the instance and the city siege as a whole.
Re: City should be redesigned
This sounds very good indeed.Nekkma wrote: Thu Nov 21, 2024 7:05 amCities should stop beeing separate scenarios imo. instead every open city instance should generate victory points (like the original stage 1 city). This way you can win even if you lose your instance and it would be worth fighting a losing instance to generate vps for the realm. The vps could be hidden until conclusion to prevent losing side from leaving. Rewards should be split between the instance and the city siege as a whole.Everdin wrote: Wed Nov 20, 2024 9:47 am In general, I did not want to talk if there should be a city or not, thread focused more on the question what happens im people leave, there should be fillup mechanics, more motivations before to stay. Atm staying in feels like you get punished because others left
#AllClassesMatter
“A man can fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame somebody else.”
― John Burroughs
“A man can fail many times, but he isn't a failure until he begins to blame somebody else.”
― John Burroughs
-
- Posts: 10
Re: City should be redesigned
Oh, hey, I was in that city too. And I was one of the few who left early. Fort win + fort Q gave me more than 100 crests 

Re: City should be redesigned
Cities are big enough to handle even two full wbs + 12 pugs, we need to fill up those cities to have the feeling of a true siege...got no sense that there are 100 to 200 attackers in a fort and 24 attacking a siege... that scenario city alike must end someday.Sinisterror wrote: Thu Nov 21, 2024 6:57 am make City's 36 vs 36. 1 Warband vs 1 Warband then fill up the 12 remaining players with Solo/Duo que's. This would be easiest and most interesting results because its hard to manipulate the que when its 1wb vs 1 wb + 12 Solos with the Guilds and the Coordinated ones : D
But nope
Back in the day were crazy fun as you could create ambush in alleys, block em and truly coordinated efforts were made between different guilds to either attack or defense cities...PQ's were active and we got to be disrupting the process of completing them while defending different parts of the city, enemy got to coordinate forces to split attacking points to advance to the last PQ.
- Sinisterror
- Posts: 1129
Re: City should be redesigned
Agreed! City being on Schedule makes zero sense imo, same with Lotd being only on weekends... But i dont know how much there is players who are interested in city scheduled or not. But i think if it was 1 Warband vs 1 Warband + 12 Solo's on eachside it would have to be done good or it would piss off the Warbands(guilds,alliances) but it would also show to those same guilds that oh Solo doesnt mean anything more than that, queing solo. There is Hatred for the Solo's and Solo Players getting less renown, less sc pops etc=) Which is just.. not very clever way to handle this. Also WAR had hidden mini instances and mini bosses during Contested Cities that had NICE Rewards. Like 6% Crit Chest and Belt with good stats/high resis and 3 talisman slots WAR always promoted People playing together even if not in same party/wb. Public quests is good example of this. WAR always promoted easily accessible content.gyps wrote: Sat Nov 23, 2024 9:37 amCities are big enough to handle even two full wbs + 12 pugs, we need to fill up those cities to have the feeling of a true siege...got no sense that there are 100 to 200 attackers in a fort and 24 attacking a siege... that scenario city alike must end someday.Sinisterror wrote: Thu Nov 21, 2024 6:57 am make City's 36 vs 36. 1 Warband vs 1 Warband then fill up the 12 remaining players with Solo/Duo que's. This would be easiest and most interesting results because its hard to manipulate the que when its 1wb vs 1 wb + 12 Solos with the Guilds and the Coordinated ones : D
But nope
Back in the day were crazy fun as you could create ambush in alleys, block em and truly coordinated efforts were made between different guilds to either attack or defense cities...PQ's were active and we got to be disrupting the process of completing them while defending different parts of the city, enemy got to coordinate forces to split attacking points to advance to the last PQ.
Like Sc's were great way to enjoy pvp as Solo queing. WAR never punished you for the way you wanted to play. I mean its almost unbeliavable how far ROR has come from the easy access pvp and as fair as possible PvP. Atm you dont even get renown from healing if you are not in a party??? wth? Stop Punishin people and make better Sc ques with no punishment for anyone for playing like they want.
This game is 70% sad 30% annoyance and fun
"To clarify, me asking to developers to go test their own changes is not sign of toxicity or anger, but a sign of hope that the people punching in the numbers remain aware of potential consequences and test their own changes"-Teefz
Ads
Re: City should be redesigned
City rewards are fine. Even losing it is not hard to get 120+ crests for 40 minutes of being stomped. Better than RvR.
However city mechanics have always been poo. Once you lose mid in phase one there is almost no reason to keep fighting. Very rarely you can slow the other WB up enough to stop them but, in general, losing mid is game over. Then they made phase 2 even worse by not forcing both sides back to start. And phase 3 has always been just a straight arena.
So, to the point of the OP, the problem of city is the core gameplay is built around murder-box mechanics. Once get your first loss, there is not much else you can do (at least in a PUG) and there is nothing else that has any visible effect on your contribution i.e. there is no agency so no point in trying.
I play a mini-game of trying to die the most but that is just a grim reminder of how pathetic the city mechanics are. Anyway, the fix does not lie in bribing people more since rewards are better than oRvR per time unit even for losing. It is just bad design and I suspect most people do it b/c they need crests not b/c it is fun.
However city mechanics have always been poo. Once you lose mid in phase one there is almost no reason to keep fighting. Very rarely you can slow the other WB up enough to stop them but, in general, losing mid is game over. Then they made phase 2 even worse by not forcing both sides back to start. And phase 3 has always been just a straight arena.
So, to the point of the OP, the problem of city is the core gameplay is built around murder-box mechanics. Once get your first loss, there is not much else you can do (at least in a PUG) and there is nothing else that has any visible effect on your contribution i.e. there is no agency so no point in trying.
I play a mini-game of trying to die the most but that is just a grim reminder of how pathetic the city mechanics are. Anyway, the fix does not lie in bribing people more since rewards are better than oRvR per time unit even for losing. It is just bad design and I suspect most people do it b/c they need crests not b/c it is fun.
Aethilmar 8x SM
Aenean 8x AM
Vusean 8x Chosen
Culwych 8x Magus
... and a host of others ...
Aenean 8x AM
Vusean 8x Chosen
Culwych 8x Magus
... and a host of others ...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], Bloodwiser and 8 guests