What a thread to pop in and say working as intended. We should make it longer.
Re: Addressing the 90 min Elephant in the room.
Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 1:48 pm
by Mikler
I completely agree with removing the fort timer. With the old system the population would generally re-balance after fort to create more city instances - better for everyone.
Also, I have never understood why people care that people play both sides...
Lastly, there is nothing wrong with one realm having more population at any given time than another realm - otherwise it would be an endless slog since you can't really push a keep successfully without the other side having 20% AAO or usually more. The last thing people want, on either side, is an endless slog in an end-zone when both the other forts are locked. I actually enjoy RVR most while pushing the T2/T3 zones after city sieges.
Re: Addressing the 90 min Elephant in the room.
Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 2:03 pm
by Qorth
5 city instances between 12 and 1am est seems on par with usual. maybe i'm missing something
Re: Addressing the 90 min Elephant in the room.
Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 2:05 pm
by Zhentarim
Phantasm wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 1:06 pm
With people constantly joining and leaving game good luck with building proper 24 man for city. What about filling roles which are lacking? Without control over who to get to warband we are all pugs then.
This really doesnt affect me for I am not an xrealmer, you have to adapt and overcome I guess.
Phantasm wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 1:06 pm
And people keep forgeting about those warband makers and content creators. Imagine RoR without people like Rowan, Brodda, Evilspinray, Realization, Bombling, Rolgrom etc.
Leaders come and go, if xrealmers cant adapt to changes that affects them there will be new leaders. And whenever these leaders decide to complain about something on the forums, that does not make their complaints some grand wisdom of truth. They are just people like everyone else. I can imagine RoR without them because Ive experienced RoR without them just like so many others.
You realise its about fort lockout? Getting own realm to the forts, winning it make you lock to dominant side and gives no city pops in return cause of population balance.
The solution to that is not to make switching back and forth easier. It would be to make those that took part in fort and pushed the realm to victory to have priority in the city queue.
With people constantly joining and leaving game good luck with building proper 24 man for city. What about filling roles which are lacking? Without control over who to get to warband we are all pugs then.
And people keep forgeting about those warband makers and content creators. Imagine RoR without people like Rowan, Brodda, Evilspinray, Realization, Bombling, Rolgrom etc.
I find it very amusing that some people in this topic speak on behalf of the player base or Brodda, Evbilspinray, Realization, Bombling, Rolgrom and... Rowan? Some of these players don't build city warbands, some of them don't x-realm. For instance I'm pretty sure that Brodda is quite happy that some people stoped x-realming for cities so Nobodies and EWG have more potent players for cities on destro side.
This topic is created by one group of players that suffer the most from this ruling.
I don't see the reason why do you want to bring your premade warband(if you have a choise) to the realm that have 20% more players and rvdoor for the city. Then you log on underdog side to do what? You already didn't help the underdog side nor you're going to help it in your Instance 1, nor you're creating any interesting content for anybody except your own group. That way underdog stays underdog all the time. In that sense I have much more respect to people like Bombling or Brodda then x-realmers that just log to dominating side for a city push.
Because Bombling or Brodda are actually contributing to communities they play with and through that to realms they play for.
In my opinion having difficulties with making 24 man warband is the consequense of this kind of game style because you aren't contributing to communities or organizations. So not only you can't build 24 man but nobody can build 24 man because nobody have players that want to commit to an organization.
As for 24 man premade. Can anybody remind me how many guilds are actually interested in scheduled 24vs24 and not in random stomps when enemy's or your group have 18 man + /a or /5.
I can tell you how many guilds responded to our call for more scheduled skrimishes - two.
That leads me to a conclusion that good fights/good rvr/interesting pvp isn't that strong motivation after all.
This game has mostly player driven content. Nobody is holding you from actually creating it.
You realise its about fort lockout? Getting own realm to the forts, winning it make you lock to dominant side and gives no city pops in return cause of population balance.
The solution to that is not to make switching back and forth easier. It would be to make those that took part in fort and pushed the realm to victory to have priority in the city queue.
With people constantly joining and leaving game good luck with building proper 24 man for city. What about filling roles which are lacking? Without control over who to get to warband we are all pugs then.
And people keep forgeting about those warband makers and content creators. Imagine RoR without people like Rowan, Brodda, Evilspinray, Realization, Bombling, Rolgrom etc.
Re: Addressing the 90 min Elephant in the room.
Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 2:53 pm
by Ravai
wargrimnir wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 1:39 pm
What a thread to pop in and say working as intended. We should make it longer.
From what I understand you don't even play the game anymore? I mean if you did you'd realise how dumb a lockout is before content that requires both sides are equal, I really try to be diplomatic but its a silly change that benefits nobody and leaves a poor image of the server if you are new, got to the endgame and wasn't able to take part.
Re: Addressing the 90 min Elephant in the room.
Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 2:54 pm
by DirkDaring
Rowanmantle wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 4:44 am
Firstly I want to take a moment to thank you and all those involved who managed to bring this old dead game back to life. I cannot imagine the amount of work it took or the resources you yourself had to invest into this game and running a successful private server.
I have been on this server for a long time since t2 was King and max lvl was 21. I regularly run warbands on both factions and have only recently started being active on destro and it has breathed some life back into the game for me.
Now to address the aforementioned elephant…
This new change you have made regarding the lockout timer in forts I feel is not working as you perhaps envisioned it to. Sure I can see the thought process behind it, stopping people who x-realm only to be on the more dominant sides. However this has now caused issues to those of us who have the option and the characters to play the lesser populated side.
True it was intended to stop x-realming. However if we (my warband) are pushing a city on destro for instance, we have to go into forts to secure the victory of said fort. Or to assist the realm in taking zones. Whereas before we could push the city on either side then swap over to the opposing side and queue for the city we cannot now.
Yes some would say this is the reason the xtended lockout was put in place, but it defeats the logic behind it. Because now we are locked on the more dominant side and cannot even have the option to switch over if it was in our power to do so. Causing there to be another city or even two. So then what is the solution? Do we simply make sign ups and gather our guild mates and friends and prohibit them from entering any fort on either side.
Just so we can have their lockouts saved for when we build our city warbands.
I do not have a great solution to this but perhaps one that if applicable can perhaps still keep the REAL xrealmers at bay.
If a person has been playing on one side for more than 2 hours and 30 minutes they will receive no lockout once entering the fort on either side.
Giving those people the option then to swap to either side of their own free will. Yet keeping the lockout-extender for those who have recently logged in to the more dominant or either less dominant side.
Honestly, there are guilds and discords on this server created solely so that people can be able to play both sides in an organized manner with friends/allies/guilds. However these discords/guilds can no longer do this, unless they prohibit their own members from joining either fort.
I am open to hear any feedback on this, I am also not ignorant and understand why this extender was put in place, yet feel that during NA times it serves little purpose for those who actually want to make a difference in the lakes.
Again thank you for the continued service you do for this server and the many hours of free time you give up to work on this game that we are all so invested in. Truly it is a marvel to still play Warhammer even after so many years since they closed the last few servers.
Sounds like it is working the way it was designed to. Instead of riding the Zerg wave on the Dominate side in order to push City, then swapping to the underdog to take advantage of faster city pops, then being delusional, and thinking you are doing it to help the underdog side, and help the community.
If you were truly wanting to actually help the underdog side , game balance to, and help the community, you`d play the underdog all the time, not just swap to them after you have zerged the Fk out of them pushing city. HAHAHA
Re: Addressing the 90 min Elephant in the room.
Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 3:20 pm
by Rydiak
This change sounds like it is working as intended. Zerg-surfing to a city and then switching realms to defend said city with instant-queues because you are now on the underdog side doesn't exactly sound logical or fair. It almost sounds exploitive of the ORvR reward system. If you want to gear out your character on the other realm, why not just start the night already playing that character?
Re: Addressing the 90 min Elephant in the room.
Posted: Sat May 08, 2021 3:24 pm
by Despairhatred2
Spoiler:
Rydiak wrote: Sat May 08, 2021 3:20 pm
This change sounds like it is working as intended. Zerg-surfing to a city and then switching realms to defend said city with instant-queues because you are now on the underdog side doesn't exactly sound logical or fair. It almost sounds exploitive of the ORvR reward system. If you want to gear out your character on the other realm, why not just start the night already playing that character?
Ah **** here comes the wannabe garbage realm champ warrior priest how can you be bad on the most overtuned spec in the game
