RVR new system feedback

[navis]

Go ahead ban be Azareal, you said you never banned someone for their opinion. Make it happen.

[Azarael]

I won't ban you for your opinion. I'll ban you for posting in an unconstructive manner and for being dumb enough to respond to a warning by asking for a ban.

It's simple. You are welcome to dislike what I do. I am not perfect, and will never claim to be. All that I ask is that you post constructive feedback that I can work with, which most people do, and which I respond to and make changes based upon accordingly. You posted a rant and a whine about our rules, and so you've proved yourself worthless to me and to the project, because I am not interested in your gnashing of teeth and aimless whinge, I am interested in the problems that you identify and your proposed solutions to them. Accordingly, you will temporarily lose your privilege to post on these forums, and this will happen again and again until you understand what I expect from you.

Take 3 days to consider what useful feedback looks like, then come back.

[flintboth]

My feedback for the RvR change, thanks, some good things, just need to equilibrate Tier by Tier.
My english is not fluent to speak about what is boring and what is good for me in my game opinion, so hope you can find the good on the way you have choose.
Make this game fun for all.

[Thelen]

One aspect of the change I'd like to comment on is that its currently 1AM EST. Not a big population at this time on the server. The only zone left is Dragonwake. Both keeps are at r0 with max supplies run to them. We've called in /t4 for an hour and can't get enough destro in zone to upgrade the keep to r1 (thus letting us attack the other keep). Scenarios don't pop either at this time. The new system kills what little RvR happened late NA time, by placing a minimum amount to attack a keep. I wonder if this could be looked at? Usually at those times once a keep gets pushed it draws people (if only a few) into the lakes. That can't happen anymore.

[lastalien]

Frankly, the current system RVR in comparison with SC not attractive. On SC, we are guaranteed to get is almost always the same number of opponent and a good reward in RR, and medals.
The main motivation of people to be in RVR is a funny fighting a comparable adversary, a good reward in the form of RR, influence in the region, with medals kills and medals with the acquisition objects.
Comparable amounts of enemy formed if all satisfied with the current system. Yesterday after the last patch, we got a good fights in RVR in TM , and was comparable to the number of Destr and Order, I would like to think that this is due to the fact that people have become RVR is acceptable updated rules.


As an experiment, I can offer to make in bonuses for RVR through changes in the quest for the capture of the castle, for example, to complicate the quest, making it not just for the capture, but to win with good resistance. As a reward, for example, you can give a rare set of dyes , an external look for weapons and armor, mb mounts etc. And the change sets for the winner every 2 weeks.

[Tiggo]

Dont forget: RvR has no real goal YET (which will be: capture the enemy city). It will bring a lot of people to the lakes when there is real meaning in getting the t4 zones. Right now focus on testing the mechanics etc. Low population count in USA Time Zone is an argument though and im pretty sure Aza is looking at it

All in all im very satisfied about the direction rvr is heading right now. (Personal opinion als always

[Morf]

Will reply and post here as posting in changelog thread isnt the right place.

The solid, old system that encouraged zerging, sitting in front of a door for 20 minutes spamming skills at it and funnelling?

Sorry, friend. Can't please everyone. I suggest you learn to deal with things rather than offering unsupported opinion and subtly pushing for a rollback.

The feelings of nectaneboII are echoed by me and alot of ppl i play with in thinking the old system was better and less zerg friendly which i will try my best to explain.

Firstly only having one open zone promotes zerging, with the old system you could split a zerg by sending a small force to work on another zone, you could call this avoiding pvp and im the first person to hate on ppl avoiding pvp in a pvp game however in the grand scheme of the campaign this is and always was a good way to split the zerg or to cap a zone on the sly which could prevent or massively slow down a push to the enemy capital city.

Resource carriers, i really did like this idea but having played it for some time i find it pretty boring, while bo's are important at the start of a zone push they soon become pretty pointless, when you have enough stars to siege a keep you can forget about them.
This also has a knock on affect for small groups, previously you could capture bo's to halt a keep siege and in doing so there were times when the zerg side slowly gave up due to poor organisation in holding bo's or good teamwork by smaller groups.

Roaming the past few days all i have seen is a zerg of players escorting resources and eventually zerging to a keep at which point its an artillery/magus,engi fight, its not fun.
As someone who plays in small groups no longer do i try to help at keep sieges or defenses due to artillery and the range of magus/engi, no longer do i feel the need to capture bo's for my realm and tbh no longer do i feel to rvr at all with the zerg situation being worse then it was previously, the only options for small groups are to play the back and fourth bs, wc to ms in praag, pve wc to keep in tm, wc to shrine of conqueror in caledor etc or to follow the zerg and use them as a meat shield.

You will never stop zerging, the zones are to small and ppl will always blob together for safety however the new system does nothing to stop this, imo it promotes it more then the old system.

As for funnelling, funnelling and using a defensive position to your advantage especially when fighting a larger force is natural and imo shouldnt be punished as drastically as it is (artillery damage), given the zerg side will likely have access to more siege weapons it does more for the zerg then it does for the lesser force and due to oil having a tiny life span its useless other then to get yourself a few kills.
As i have said in the past although i know currently its not possible, siege ladders/siege towers would fix this as the funneling side would have to also defend the walls aswell as the door way.

I would much prefer the previous system with changes being made when client control is possible instead of what we have at the moment.

[Tesq]

i think that sieges weapons and rams should take more resource and ye we need a force way to spread ppl, if multiple zone cant be open then we need x flag linked to aao to be under your controll to hit the keep this will force ppl to spread and totally cover the zone.

[Azarael]

Firstly only having one open zone promotes zerging, with the old system you could split a zerg by sending a small force to work on another zone, you could call this avoiding pvp and im the first person to hate on ppl avoiding pvp in a pvp game however in the grand scheme of the campaign this is and always was a good way to split the zerg or to cap a zone on the sly which could prevent or massively slow down a push to the enemy capital city.

It was avoiding PvP and that's exactly what people used it for. The RvR zones in T4 are very large. There is no excuse for what people were actually doing, which had nothing to do with tactics and everything to do with avoiding fights. A zone not working in your favour? Don't worry, just move to another zone! The enemy will follow you and sacrifice all progress in their previous zone to defend their keep. More time spent hopping around than actually fighting.

We do not have the playerbase to afford splitting 400 players (at best!) in T4 RvR between three zones without reintroducing empty keep bollocks - especially when you consider that if the server should ever have a 4000 cap... exactly the same issue will manifest. The mechanics have to work now.

Resource carriers, i really did like this idea but having played it for some time i find it pretty boring, while bo's are important at the start of a zone push they soon become pretty pointless, when you have enough stars to siege a keep you can forget about them.
This also has a knock on affect for small groups, previously you could capture bo's to halt a keep siege and in doing so there were times when the zerg side slowly gave up due to poor organisation in holding bo's or good teamwork by smaller groups.

All this means is that the decay timer needs to be linked to keep rank to make maintaining map control relevant, but see below for why I haven't done anything like that.

In assault situations, the onus is on the defenders to contest the BOs, because without those BOs, the defending keep's rank can't be sustained and its door cannot be repaired. If people don't choose to do that, then yes, holding the BOs will be less relevant to you - but the repairs from returning resources were intended to be the punishment for failing to fully control the map, not the maintenance of your own keep.

Roaming the past few days all i have seen is a zerg of players escorting resources and eventually zerging to a keep at which point its an artillery/magus,engi fight, its not fun.
As someone who plays in small groups no longer do i try to help at keep sieges or defenses due to artillery and the range of magus/engi, no longer do i feel the need to capture bo's for my realm and tbh no longer do i feel to rvr at all with the zerg situation being worse then it was previously, the only options for small groups are to play the back and fourth bs, wc to ms in praag, pve wc to keep in tm, wc to shrine of conqueror in caledor etc or to follow the zerg and use them as a meat shield.

You will never stop zerging, the zones are to small and ppl will always blob together for safety however the new system does nothing to stop this, imo it promotes it more then the old system.

And this zerg somehow manages to move as one yet control the whole map with short lock timers? I had feedback previously stating that it was not even possible to take a keep because the attacking force was overstretched trying to cover everything, and from when I was playing, I didn't see the hallmark of the old system, which was every single person in the zone in the same place. So, which is it, please? I really need to know now, because I don't want to start making continued control of BOs even more relevant to sustaining a siege if in the next changelog I'm going to hear "Keeps are impossible to take again, we're overstretched".

As for funnelling, funnelling and using a defensive position to your advantage especially when fighting a larger force is natural and imo shouldnt be punished as drastically as it is (artillery damage), given the zerg side will likely have access to more siege weapons it does more for the zerg then it does for the lesser force and due to oil having a tiny life span its useless other then to get yourself a few kills.
As i have said in the past although i know currently its not possible, siege ladders/siege towers would fix this as the funneling side would have to also defend the walls aswell as the door way.

Of course it should be punished, because for all the complaining about the current system being boring, funneling was worse. A realm would actively refuse to defend the outer door simply because it was more efficient to farm renown by forcing attackers through a tiny space where they could barely move and got spammed by mass AoE on the other side. That is terrible design.

Yes, siege towers are a superior implementation, but as you've noticed, we don't have the ability to use them yet.

[Morf]

Spoiler:

Firstly only having one open zone promotes zerging, with the old system you could split a zerg by sending a small force to work on another zone, you could call this avoiding pvp and im the first person to hate on ppl avoiding pvp in a pvp game however in the grand scheme of the campaign this is and always was a good way to split the zerg or to cap a zone on the sly which could prevent or massively slow down a push to the enemy capital city.

It was avoiding PvP and that's exactly what people used it for. The RvR zones in T4 are very large. There is no excuse for what people were actually doing, which had nothing to do with tactics and everything to do with avoiding fights. A zone not working in your favour? Don't worry, just move to another zone! The enemy will follow you and sacrifice all progress in their previous zone to defend their keep. More time spent hopping around than actually fighting.

We do not have the playerbase to afford splitting 400 players (at best!) in T4 RvR between three zones without reintroducing empty keep bollocks.

Resource carriers, i really did like this idea but having played it for some time i find it pretty boring, while bo's are important at the start of a zone push they soon become pretty pointless, when you have enough stars to siege a keep you can forget about them.
This also has a knock on affect for small groups, previously you could capture bo's to halt a keep siege and in doing so there were times when the zerg side slowly gave up due to poor organisation in holding bo's or good teamwork by smaller groups.

All this means is that the decay timer needs to be linked to keep rank to make maintaining map control relevant, but see below for why I haven't done anything like that.

In assault situations, the onus is on the defenders to contest the BOs, because without those BOs, the defending keep's rank can't be sustained and its door cannot be repaired. If people don't choose to do that, then yes, holding the BOs will be less relevant to you - but the repairs from returning resources were intended to be the punishment for failing to fully control the map, not the maintenance of your own keep.

Roaming the past few days all i have seen is a zerg of players escorting resources and eventually zerging to a keep at which point its an artillery/magus,engi fight, its not fun.
As someone who plays in small groups no longer do i try to help at keep sieges or defenses due to artillery and the range of magus/engi, no longer do i feel the need to capture bo's for my realm and tbh no longer do i feel to rvr at all with the zerg situation being worse then it was previously, the only options for small groups are to play the back and fourth bs, wc to ms in praag, pve wc to keep in tm, wc to shrine of conqueror in caledor etc or to follow the zerg and use them as a meat shield.

You will never stop zerging, the zones are to small and ppl will always blob together for safety however the new system does nothing to stop this, imo it promotes it more then the old system.

And this zerg somehow manages to move as one yet control the whole map with short lock timers? I had feedback previously stating that it was not even possible to take a keep because the attacking force was overstretched trying to cover everything, and from when I was playing, I didn't see the hallmark of the old system, which was every single person in the zone in the same place. So, which is it, please?

As for funnelling, funnelling and using a defensive position to your advantage especially when fighting a larger force is natural and imo shouldnt be punished as drastically as it is (artillery damage), given the zerg side will likely have access to more siege weapons it does more for the zerg then it does for the lesser force and due to oil having a tiny life span its useless other then to get yourself a few kills.
As i have said in the past although i know currently its not possible, siege ladders/siege towers would fix this as the funneling side would have to also defend the walls aswell as the door way.

Of course it should be punished, because for all the complaining about the current system being boring, funneling was worse. A realm would actively refuse to defend the outer door simply because it was more efficient to farm renown by forcing attackers through a tiny space where they could barely move and got spammed by mass AoE on the other side. That is terrible design.

Yes, siege towers are a superior implementation, but as you've noticed, we don't have the ability to use them yet.

I was in the process of writing a wall of text and respond to your points but tbh i dont think there is any point, what i said is what i see in rvr and what i and others feel, we are getting bored with rvr in its current state, it is a step backwards instead of forwards, whether you agree or not it promotes zerging, zerg or be zerged.
You will never stop ppl zerging but at the same time the new system does nothing to stop this, the old system done more, this is imo your downfall, you cant change the natural behaviour of players, this is naive, you have to give some leeway.
I and others understand you have a direction and you put alot of effort into this, we respect this but negative feedback gets broken down bit by bit and thrown out the window, we respect everything you do its a neverending battle and something that will never be perfect but i wish those of us who disagree would be taken more seriously.
Alot of us of late feel things are being changed for the worse, and the rvr system is one of them.