Fort defence rewards

[Mordd]

The newer system of bags but reducing invaders for a loss is causing fewer people to try and defend. Unless you are in a good/active group or WB there is no point in going to a losing fort now. One invader just isnt worth the aggravation, so unless people have a stacked WB/group to have a chance at a bag people just dont go. Before on a loss you got 3 invaders and it was worth at least showing up and trying. Now I see a lopsided fort and just go do something else instead being farmed in a loss and getting nothing for it.

[skylinx]

During EU primetime defender's often hit cap in forts. During the 'off' hours forts are defended by those who are available online, the population during these hours is low at the moment.

[GamesBond]

Playing some game modes just for the sake of the rewards and not participating in a 30 minutes defense because it has 2 medallions less than usual is one of the issues in the player-driven campaign. Let's consider such threads are causing a domino effect, players who initially wanted to defend won't anymore and you're kind of dooming your timezone's fort win-rate.

Nevertheless when there were more rewards for the loser side, throwing was occurring more often. At least in the EU prime-time, throwing is drastically less in forts now. Just 2 days ago, the last fort was fiercely defended and a 5 stars city has been denied. It has also happened several times.

The bags for defending a keep have been requested and provided, you can read some people asking to throw outer gate in order to win a bag roll. These people could potentially make the whole community lose such implementations of bags which is one of the reasons why throwing or pushing to throw are against the rules.

If you're going to play just for the sake of maximizing rewards wherever you go, you'll end up leaving out of frustration sooner or later.

Play the game to enjoy it first and to gear up second. You can do both perfectly.

[mynban]

Isnt it possible to swap cap system from attacker to defender? Only defender amount of attackers can go in kind of.

Also good luck expecting people behaving in a utilitarian way, never gonna happen. Game mechanics need to take human nature and expected behavior into consideration otherwise created system will fail without exception.

[BeautfulToad]

Playing some game modes just for the sake of the rewards and not participating in a 30 minutes defense because it has 2 medallions less than usual is one of the issues in the player-driven campaign. Let's consider such threads are causing a domino effect, players who initially wanted to defend won't anymore and you're kind of dooming your timezone's fort win-rate.

Nevertheless when there were more rewards for the loser side, throwing was occurring more often. At least in the EU prime-time, throwing is drastically less in forts now. Just 2 days ago, the last fort was fiercely defended and a 5 stars city has been denied. It has also happened several times.

The bags for defending a keep have been requested and provided, you can read some people asking to throw outer gate in order to win a bag roll. These people could potentially make the whole community lose such implementations of bags which is one of the reasons why throwing or pushing to throw are against the rules.

If you're going to play just for the sake of maximizing rewards wherever you go, you'll end up leaving out of frustration sooner or later.

Play the game to enjoy it first and to gear up second. You can do both perfectly.

While I understand the reward system, there needs to be much higher stakes and rewards in forts so people see them as big events. The current system kind of feels ror is trolling you. Forts are meant to be the 2nd most important battle after city. Before city, forts were really fun because they were endgame and everyone cared. Rewards are there to encourage players to participate.

Give 10-20 triumphant emblems to people who score max DBs/damage/protection/heal/etc on destro and order and watch the forts fill up. Maybe a few keeps will be thrown but it is almost like that now anyway where most keeps fall under massive AAO pressure. In fact more forts are probably thrown to push city. At least people LF city wbs before reservations for the fort. But the dev team should stop worrying about 1-2 bad apples who may seek to max rewards.

You are talking about 10 players (5-6 on each side) out of two hundred (top 5%) getting 1% of the required medals. If you can announce the winners in automated messages at the end or, better yet, have a leaderboard that accumulates winners of these emblems over time, it would let the community partake in their second favourite past-time in ror: boasting to other players while also ensuring noone gets BiS if they never "deserved it" which seems important to the dev team

Focus on rewarding behaviour you want to see, not punishing everyone because there's some behaviour you dont want to see

[GamesBond]

Playing some game modes just for the sake of the rewards and not participating in a 30 minutes defense because it has 2 medallions less than usual is one of the issues in the player-driven campaign. Let's consider such threads are causing a domino effect, players who initially wanted to defend won't anymore and you're kind of dooming your timezone's fort win-rate.

Nevertheless when there were more rewards for the loser side, throwing was occurring more often. At least in the EU prime-time, throwing is drastically less in forts now. Just 2 days ago, the last fort was fiercely defended and a 5 stars city has been denied. It has also happened several times.

The bags for defending a keep have been requested and provided, you can read some people asking to throw outer gate in order to win a bag roll. These people could potentially make the whole community lose such implementations of bags which is one of the reasons why throwing or pushing to throw are against the rules.

If you're going to play just for the sake of maximizing rewards wherever you go, you'll end up leaving out of frustration sooner or later.

Play the game to enjoy it first and to gear up second. You can do both perfectly.

While I understand the reward system, there needs to be much higher stakes and rewards in forts so people see them as big events. The current system kind of feels ror is trolling you. Forts are meant to be the 2nd most important battle after city. Before city, forts were really fun because they were endgame and everyone cared. Rewards are there to encourage players to participate.

Give 10-20 triumphant emblems to people who score max DBs/damage/protection/heal/etc on destro and order and watch the forts fill up. Maybe a few keeps will be thrown but it is almost like that now anyway where most keeps fall under massive AAO pressure. In fact more forts are probably thrown to push city. At least people LF city wbs before reservations for the fort. But the dev team should stop worrying about 1-2 bad apples who may seek to max rewards.

You are talking about 10 players (5-6 on each side) out of two hundred (top 5%) getting 1% of the required medals. If you can announce the winners in automated messages at the end or, better yet, have a leaderboard that accumulates winners of these emblems over time, it would let the community partake in their second favourite past-time in ror: boasting to other players while also ensuring noone gets BiS if they never "deserved it" which seems important to the dev team

Focus on rewarding behaviour you want to see, not punishing everyone because there's some behaviour you dont want to see

There will be more rewards for the RvR campaign in general, based on the underdog side, but first of all Triumphant Emblems are for ranked, let's get that out of the way of RvR.

Secondly, you're basing your info on off-peak hours, in the EU primetime, the forts get defended as needed. Surely there could be some throwing here and there, but in general it's better than how it was. We keep saying that it's a player-driven campaign, players are the main decision makers and warband leaders have more impact than they believe they have. Less rewards in fort for the losing side makes throwing more painful, do not blame the devs for that, blame the people who made throwing more trendy.

[Akalukz]

Playing some game modes just for the sake of the rewards and not participating in a 30 minutes defense because it has 2 medallions less than usual is one of the issues in the player-driven campaign. Let's consider such threads are causing a domino effect, players who initially wanted to defend won't anymore and you're kind of dooming your timezone's fort win-rate.

Nevertheless when there were more rewards for the loser side, throwing was occurring more often. At least in the EU prime-time, throwing is drastically less in forts now. Just 2 days ago, the last fort was fiercely defended and a 5 stars city has been denied. It has also happened several times.

The bags for defending a keep have been requested and provided, you can read some people asking to throw outer gate in order to win a bag roll. These people could potentially make the whole community lose such implementations of bags which is one of the reasons why throwing or pushing to throw are against the rules.

If you're going to play just for the sake of maximizing rewards wherever you go, you'll end up leaving out of frustration sooner or later.

Play the game to enjoy it first and to gear up second. You can do both perfectly.

While I understand the reward system, there needs to be much higher stakes and rewards in forts so people see them as big events. The current system kind of feels ror is trolling you. Forts are meant to be the 2nd most important battle after city. Before city, forts were really fun because they were endgame and everyone cared. Rewards are there to encourage players to participate.

Give 10-20 triumphant emblems to people who score max DBs/damage/protection/heal/etc on destro and order and watch the forts fill up. Maybe a few keeps will be thrown but it is almost like that now anyway where most keeps fall under massive AAO pressure. In fact more forts are probably thrown to push city. At least people LF city wbs before reservations for the fort. But the dev team should stop worrying about 1-2 bad apples who may seek to max rewards.

You are talking about 10 players (5-6 on each side) out of two hundred (top 5%) getting 1% of the required medals. If you can announce the winners in automated messages at the end or, better yet, have a leaderboard that accumulates winners of these emblems over time, it would let the community partake in their second favourite past-time in ror: boasting to other players while also ensuring noone gets BiS if they never "deserved it" which seems important to the dev team

Focus on rewarding behaviour you want to see, not punishing everyone because there's some behaviour you dont want to see

There will be more rewards for the RvR campaign in general, based on the underdog side, but first of all Triumphant Emblems are for ranked, let's get that out of the way of RvR.

Secondly, you're basing your info on off-peak hours, in the EU primetime, the forts get defended as needed. Surely there could be some throwing here and there, but in general it's better than how it was. We keep saying that it's a player-driven campaign, players are the main decision makers and warband leaders have more impact than they believe they have. Less rewards in fort for the losing side makes throwing more painful, do not blame the devs for that, blame the people who made throwing more trendy.

Or you know, don't make so many gates to content. People throw forts/keeps because it becomes the only reliable way to get certain gear. Especially if your playtime sees your realm mostly on the losing side of things. honestly too much gear is gated for such a small playerbase and vast difference between peak / off peak game play.

[GamesBond]

Spoiler:

While I understand the reward system, there needs to be much higher stakes and rewards in forts so people see them as big events. The current system kind of feels ror is trolling you. Forts are meant to be the 2nd most important battle after city. Before city, forts were really fun because they were endgame and everyone cared. Rewards are there to encourage players to participate.

Give 10-20 triumphant emblems to people who score max DBs/damage/protection/heal/etc on destro and order and watch the forts fill up. Maybe a few keeps will be thrown but it is almost like that now anyway where most keeps fall under massive AAO pressure. In fact more forts are probably thrown to push city. At least people LF city wbs before reservations for the fort. But the dev team should stop worrying about 1-2 bad apples who may seek to max rewards.

You are talking about 10 players (5-6 on each side) out of two hundred (top 5%) getting 1% of the required medals. If you can announce the winners in automated messages at the end or, better yet, have a leaderboard that accumulates winners of these emblems over time, it would let the community partake in their second favourite past-time in ror: boasting to other players while also ensuring noone gets BiS if they never "deserved it" which seems important to the dev team

Focus on rewarding behaviour you want to see, not punishing everyone because there's some behaviour you dont want to see

There will be more rewards for the RvR campaign in general, based on the underdog side, but first of all Triumphant Emblems are for ranked, let's get that out of the way of RvR.

Secondly, you're basing your info on off-peak hours, in the EU primetime, the forts get defended as needed. Surely there could be some throwing here and there, but in general it's better than how it was. We keep saying that it's a player-driven campaign, players are the main decision makers and warband leaders have more impact than they believe they have. Less rewards in fort for the losing side makes throwing more painful, do not blame the devs for that, blame the people who made throwing more trendy.

Or you know, don't make so many gates to content. People throw forts/keeps because it becomes the only reliable way to get certain gear. Especially if your playtime sees your realm mostly on the losing side of things. honestly too much gear is gated for such a small playerbase and vast difference between peak / off peak game play.

You've been around enough on RoR to know that we've added solutions to give invaders and royals out of City Siege. It's the top gear, it needs time to be farmed. That's the grindy part of MMORPG games.

[Akalukz]

Spoiler:

There will be more rewards for the RvR campaign in general, based on the underdog side, but first of all Triumphant Emblems are for ranked, let's get that out of the way of RvR.

Secondly, you're basing your info on off-peak hours, in the EU primetime, the forts get defended as needed. Surely there could be some throwing here and there, but in general it's better than how it was. We keep saying that it's a player-driven campaign, players are the main decision makers and warband leaders have more impact than they believe they have. Less rewards in fort for the losing side makes throwing more painful, do not blame the devs for that, blame the people who made throwing more trendy.

Or you know, don't make so many gates to content. People throw forts/keeps because it becomes the only reliable way to get certain gear. Especially if your playtime sees your realm mostly on the losing side of things. honestly too much gear is gated for such a small playerbase and vast difference between peak / off peak game play.

You've been around enough on RoR to know that we've added solutions to give invaders and royals out of City Siege. It's the top gear, it needs time to be farmed. That's the grindy part of MMORPG games.

For sure, just never was a big fan of gated gear. Invader is barely top tier anymore. It's almost required to even be competive in ORvR or scenarios. Sov/Warlord even Victorious I can see being gated, but mid tier sets, nah just gotta let those roll out to keep new players happy with progression. The difference between a newish player at RR45 or RR50 and a lvl 80 with Sov gear is extreme. I know someone don't want to see it as a big issue, but it definetely is. Maybe do some exit interviews when you see truly new players or old players return then leave again. Gear gap is large.

Drop some low level sets

Entry lvl at say lvl 18 should be devestator
25 = Anni / Merc
35 = Conq
45 = Vanq
55 = Invader
(OR redo some of the set bonuses to mimic end game sets and adjust bolster to go through RR60)

Redo the "drops" in bags flips. The idea should be to keep players competitive enough to stick around to end game content. As a long time player, i see a ton of players leave at lv38 thru RR50 because they are just absolutely destroyed by BiS players.

[ufthakk]

Imo no timeline or parellel universe i would say "forts were really fun".
What's wrong about the idea to add an lockout to city but give gold bags with souv ?
Is it too much affort or u dont like the idea ?
I think the campaign gameplay would benefit.