Biggest problem on Live is still the biggest problem on RoR

[CountTalabecland]

Back to the OP's point, I agree that this problem was what killed a lot of the casual interest in live and partially caused the death of this game relatively quickly as a major MMO.

I do not agree that it is an easy fix. Telling people what and when to play would spell trouble as so many have pointed out. It seems to me the answer is to somehow make the less populated side more powerful (buff somehow) so that their numbers count for more. I recognize that is abstract but the answer is certainly not to punish the side that has more numbers just for being popular (don't get me wrong I still dislike you destro gits but its not your fault you are the way you are).

[kmark101]

I remember on Live that participating/winning in scenarios (and to a lesser extent, PQ's) also contributed to the realm war effort and lock.

Maybe it would be a good idea to introduce it here as well, so the smaller faction could que to - numberwise - balanced scenarios and still contribute to the effort, albeit it should always be lower than participating in ORVR. (PQ's should never count thou)

[Onemantankwall]

Eastest fix it a reverse aao, mythic was on that dope when they created it... Renown tax the zerg to discourage uneven numbers mythic just didnt care about the game why continue to feed into losing your subs to one sidedness? Simple solution is to reverse aao instead of renown gain for lower population reduce the renown for the blob idk why they were scared to punish zerging but a discouragement is needed. This is a multi solution fixing zerg farming, rage quitting, and xrealming all in one you want to stear the players into a even fight not take half the server out of it with some kind of population cap

[adamthelc]

The problem with that is your are basically discouraging people from playing. And since there are more people on that side, you are discouraging the majority of players from playing. Now if the idea is that they will switch sides to even it out, that isnt a bad idea. But how many people will just stop playing instead of switching?

It's a bad idea, you should never discourage people from playing.

The problem is that the underpopulated side gets wiped over and over. It's not people wanting to play on 1 side. You could give a buff to the underpopulated side. But if you ever played wintergrasp on an uneven server you would know that not very fun.

I think the problem is how hard it is to get kills on the underpopulated side. If you were killing as many of the other side as they killed of you, people would still be having fun. Even if they ultimately still lost. Part of the reason it's hard to get kills is because of how healing acts as a force multiplier.

There are some things you could do about that. You could reduce healing on the larger side, but that would make healing not very fun. You could significantly reduce the wounds of the larger side, but that would lead to well played smaller groups blowing up larger groups. Or you could increase damage taken by the larger group, but that's not very different than giving the other side a damage buff.

If there were an easy fix, it would have been done already. There are serious cons to every idea. People are going to complain about any change. So if your idea fails hard enough you could lose a serious chunk of people.

The problem with most people throwing around ideas is that they usually just think of the good points of their special idea and dont consider the negative side effects.

[keykey]

The only solution to the problem that you correctly asses to be the biggest problem on Live and still the biggest problem on RoR is a solution that is not implementable, and that is to have 3 factions. That's the only solution to this. And it cannot be done here. So all we can hope for with regard to a PvP oriented MMO set in the Old World is for there to be a new game created. And I would hope at some point GW and whatever video game company they partner with this time can learn from the mistakes of the past and also learn from the things WAR did right, and make the game that WAR should have been.

[Onemantankwall]

The problem with that is your are basically discouraging people from playing. And since there are more people on that side, you are discouraging the majority of players from playing. Now if the idea is that they will switch sides to even it out, that isnt a bad idea. But how many people will just stop playing instead of switching?

It's a bad idea, you should never discourage people from playing.

The problem is that the underpopulated side gets wiped over and over. It's not people wanting to play on 1 side. You could give a buff to the underpopulated side. But if you ever played wintergrasp on an uneven server you would know that not very fun.

I think the problem is how hard it is to get kills on the underpopulated side. If you were killing as many of the other side as they killed of you, people would still be having fun. Even if they ultimately still lost. Part of the reason it's hard to get kills is because of how healing acts as a force multiplier.

There are some things you could do about that. You could reduce healing on the larger side, but that would make healing not very fun. You could significantly reduce the wounds of the larger side, but that would lead to well played smaller groups blowing up larger groups. Or you could increase damage taken by the larger group, but that's not very different than giving the other side a damage buff.

If there were an easy fix, it would have been done already. There are serious cons to every idea. People are going to complain about any change. So if your idea fails hard enough you could lose a serious chunk of people.

The problem with most people throwing around ideas is that they usually just think of the good points of their special idea and dont consider the negative side effects.

If you quit because of reduction of zerg renown and you cant just zombie play the game the community doesnt need or want you in the first place, in no way does reverse aao discourage from playing you can play and farm all you want but its not gonna get you anywhere unless you plan to play fair and balance the sides there is no downside to reverse aao exvept whining which we are already getting anyway

[adamthelc]

If you really want to stop zerging as a blob you have to make it vulnerable to another type of gameplay.

Greater or less rewards arent going to change anything, people are still going to do what is the best route to winning.

A third faction wouldnt do anything it would just be an attempt to equalize numbers, if zerging is still the best way to a win there would still be no stopping it. There would just be two smaller blobs to try and outnumber the single biggest blob.

The game system would need to change so you could somehow penalize people who wouldnt split up in getting a zone to flip. Or there would need to be a vulnerability to a large force that if properly exploited by a smaller group could make them easier to wipe.

As long as greater numbers means winning every battle it will continue.

[adamthelc]

The problem with that is your are basically discouraging people from playing. And since there are more people on that side, you are discouraging the majority of players from playing. Now if the idea is that they will switch sides to even it out, that isnt a bad idea. But how many people will just stop playing instead of switching?

It's a bad idea, you should never discourage people from playing.

The problem is that the underpopulated side gets wiped over and over. It's not people wanting to play on 1 side. You could give a buff to the underpopulated side. But if you ever played wintergrasp on an uneven server you would know that not very fun.

I think the problem is how hard it is to get kills on the underpopulated side. If you were killing as many of the other side as they killed of you, people would still be having fun. Even if they ultimately still lost. Part of the reason it's hard to get kills is because of how healing acts as a force multiplier.

There are some things you could do about that. You could reduce healing on the larger side, but that would make healing not very fun. You could significantly reduce the wounds of the larger side, but that would lead to well played smaller groups blowing up larger groups. Or you could increase damage taken by the larger group, but that's not very different than giving the other side a damage buff.

If there were an easy fix, it would have been done already. There are serious cons to every idea. People are going to complain about any change. So if your idea fails hard enough you could lose a serious chunk of people.

The problem with most people throwing around ideas is that they usually just think of the good points of their special idea and dont consider the negative side effects.

If you quit because of reduction of zerg renown and you cant just zombie play the game the community doesnt need or want you in the first place, in no way does reverse aao discourage from playing you can play and farm all you want but its not gonna get you anywhere unless you plan to play fair and balance the sides there is no downside to reverse aao exvept whining which we are already getting anyway

Right. I have no problem with switching sides. I had an idea where you actually increased the rewards for both side the closer they were to having even sides. The problem is I dont think everyone is so willing to change sides or care about things being even.

With that in mind your proposition would just ruin playing the only character or side they want to play. Do I know a lot of people would stop playing? I have no idea. But it seems like something that should be considered.

[adamthelc]

If you really want to stop zerging as a blob you have to make it vulnerable to another type of gameplay.

Greater or less rewards arent going to change anything, people are still going to do what is the best route to winning.

A third faction wouldnt do anything it would just be an attempt to equalize numbers, if zerging is still the best way to a win there would still be no stopping it. There would just be two smaller blobs to try and outnumber the single biggest blob.

The game system would need to change so you could somehow penalize people who wouldnt split up in getting a zone to flip. Or there would need to be a vulnerability to a large force that if properly exploited by a smaller group could make them easier to wipe.

As long as greater numbers means winning every battle it will continue.

So you would blob to take a keep for no renown or bags?

I am not a person you should be asking. I regularly switch sides to a side that isnt doing well and it has nothing to do with AAO. I just find playing boring when there is no challenge.

[Onemantankwall]

The problem with that is your are basically discouraging people from playing. And since there are more people on that side, you are discouraging the majority of players from playing. Now if the idea is that they will switch sides to even it out, that isnt a bad idea. But how many people will just stop playing instead of switching?

It's a bad idea, you should never discourage people from playing.

The problem is that the underpopulated side gets wiped over and over. It's not people wanting to play on 1 side. You could give a buff to the underpopulated side. But if you ever played wintergrasp on an uneven server you would know that not very fun.

I think the problem is how hard it is to get kills on the underpopulated side. If you were killing as many of the other side as they killed of you, people would still be having fun. Even if they ultimately still lost. Part of the reason it's hard to get kills is because of how healing acts as a force multiplier.

There are some things you could do about that. You could reduce healing on the larger side, but that would make healing not very fun. You could significantly reduce the wounds of the larger side, but that would lead to well played smaller groups blowing up larger groups. Or you could increase damage taken by the larger group, but that's not very different than giving the other side a damage buff.

If there were an easy fix, it would have been done already. There are serious cons to every idea. People are going to complain about any change. So if your idea fails hard enough you could lose a serious chunk of people.

The problem with most people throwing around ideas is that they usually just think of the good points of their special idea and dont consider the negative side effects.

If you quit because of reduction of zerg renown and you cant just zombie play the game the community doesnt need or want you in the first place, in no way does reverse aao discourage from playing you can play and farm all you want but its not gonna get you anywhere unless you plan to play fair and balance the sides there is no downside to reverse aao exvept whining which we are already getting anyway

Right. I have no problem with switching sides. I had an idea where you actually increased the rewards for both side the closer they were to having even sides. The problem is I dont think everyone is so willing to change sides or care about things being even.

With that in mind your proposition would just ruin playing the only character or side they want to play. Do I know a lot of people would stop playing? I have no idea. But it seems like something that should be considered.

Wouldnt ruin playing anything u can still play however u want ur just not getting freenown without earning it, want decent renown play the underpoped side