How to know ppl arn´t enjoying endgame

[HammerGuy]

Whatever happened to the really old setup for city when it was a massive battle with hundreds of players on each side? Why is that not a thing anymore? Why do fortress battles feel more large-scale than city battles?

Cities have never had hundreds of players on either side, neither on live or ROR. IIRC the original siege system was 48x48 instances, and I cannot remember what the second version of the siege system from live used for population. ROR uses the second system from live capped at 24x24.

If the live city sieges were not instanced then a big chunk of my guild (and server...) from live wouldn't have quit once we finally pushed the campaign to the city and found out it was a big scenario

Perhaps I'm misremembering the scale. I remember the fight being all over the city at the same time. I specifically remember clogging the narrow streets of Altdorf.

Even so, why can't it be a thing now? Fortresses are over 160 to 110. Imagine a city siege with similar numbers and the battle taking place in the different areas of the city. I'd take the fortress format (5 BOs open at the same time and spread out) versus the city format (5 BOs with the focus only being on one at any give time). Altdorf and IC are each larger than any of the fortresses. Why are we only using a small portion of the city for fighting?

[Rapzel]

What do you expect when you don't force people into city by shutting down rvr during siege. Ofc some will skip city and zerg some empty zone, when population is uneven.

I don't disagree with you, but city began to die when the crest change happened. Now I will admit that I do believe that the crest change was needed and beneficial for the game, but the fact that I may get around 100/hr crests from a sweaty city, compared to be able to farm them at a 300/hr queuing weekend with minimal effort makes me question the incentive to do cities. Do not get me started about the renown that is handed out like candy now days.

I still enjoy competitive cities do not get me wrong, but with the fact that you pop maybe 20 healing and a lot of AP potions in a really sweaty city I do see why it is content that has become "try hard".

[Gladiolix]

90% of the instances are total complete stomps (throwing numbers out of my ass here), sucks a lot to get farmed at spawn, very boring to farm at the spawn, sucks either way. Then there are the 10% that actually competent and close fights.

isn't it that same for oRvR? right now there is a fort 86vs26, is that the thrilling fight you search for? 80% - 90% of the Day, it's one Faction that dominates the lakes and believes, taking down a keep lord is a great achievement.

I find the most fun in this game to be small scale roaming, 2-6man, hunting similarly sized groups. Some days roaming devolves into hunting soloers due to lack of similarly sized groups, sometimes you, with a good 6man, take down a twelve man, or help a friendly warband beat 2 warbands by striking enemy squishies at the right moment with the right tactics.

I don't really care who dominates the lakes as long as I find good fights. And no, stomp forts nor keep-takes are not thrilling, but they allow you to do some shenanigans, as you know where the majority of enemies are, and where they will be and what they will do next.

[Tesq]

Whatever happened to the really old setup for city when it was a massive battle with hundreds of players on each side? Why is that not a thing anymore? Why do fortress battles feel more large-scale than city battles?

Cities have never had hundreds of players on either side, neither on live or ROR. IIRC the original siege system was 48x48 instances, and I cannot remember what the second version of the siege system from live used for population. ROR uses the second system from live capped at 24x24.

If the live city sieges were not instanced then a big chunk of my guild (and server...) from live wouldn't have quit once we finally pushed the campaign to the city and found out it was a big scenario

Perhaps I'm misremembering the scale. I remember the fight being all over the city at the same time. I specifically remember clogging the narrow streets of Altdorf.

Even so, why can't it be a thing now? Fortresses are over 160 to 110. Imagine a city siege with similar numbers and the battle taking place in the different areas of the city. I'd take the fortress format (5 BOs open at the same time and spread out) versus the city format (5 BOs with the focus only being on one at any give time). Altdorf and IC are each larger than any of the fortresses. Why are we only using a small portion of the city for fighting?

City siege was always istanced but it never was 24 vs 24 it was 48 vs 48 and later 36 vs 36.

Some ppl like me asking it to be made into a t5 open rvr zone of sort.

Anyway the current city format show problem especially due map geography because the space where we fight in this itieration arent ment for it.
The 48 vs 48 used other places. The 36 vs 36 and the current 24 vs 24 is a bandaid.

[Akalukz]

Biggest issue with the game is it's matured. Nights/Days are pretty much set with what guilds are running warbands on what nights, and the other side knows it, so population seems to fluctuate in favor of the organized guild nights. Some people see that as faction flipping when honestly, I think a lot of it is natural play times have developed around these "organized" groups and their play times. Maybe some of the guilds should look at switching up their "scheduled" games nights.

[Scottx125]

It's with everything, if people play it enough they get bored of it eventually. Cities when they first came out were played to death and peopled loved them. Because nothing's been done with them, or the meta hasn't been shaken up by balance changes. It's become old hat and nobody cares anymore.

Same with all the content in the game. You can do things to make them more relevant during like weekend SC events. But ultimately people will still get bored of that. I think a new city with a different style of city SC or a more ORVR style city event would be far cooler.

There were also campaign ideas suggested ages ago, a kind of RVRVNPC where in some of the unused zones you have PVP events that trigger on a zone lock and use cool forts that exist in the PVE part of the game world.

IMO the easy fix is a balance change. Forcing people to figure out new metas is always a good thing. Another fix that'll take more time is adding variety to the RvR campaign, and making it feel worth while to do like unlocking dungeons if you push a city etc(having the campaign and city siege progression tied together). But that's content for everyone, what about specifically end-game content for the top players and guilds? Well we already had ranked and that failed miserably. But what about an Arena type mode? You can have them take place in Altdorf or IC, players in the city can watch freely and then you can have 1v1/2v2/6v6/12v12/24v24 battles within an arena. And have monthly events for each of those sets that rewards the best K/D ratio with a reward. Obviously the reward scales up the more players are involved. And if you want you can turn this into a gold sink, allow players to buy NPC's or random events that can happen inside the arena as it's in play. Those events would affect both sides negatively or positively. Kinda like what some games do with twitch integration.

[teoklas]

how are you not enjoying zones with 260% aao and 17 premades every scenario?
jUsT m4kE A gRoUP dUh!!

[Dackle]

Cities are just the worst content in this game. 90% of the instances are total complete stomps (throwing numbers out of my ass here), sucks a lot to get farmed at spawn, very boring to farm at the spawn, sucks either way. Then there are the 10% that actually competent and close fights. As a tank or healer you work your ass off guard swapping, etc. tank duties or healing, rezzing etc. heal duties. After the first half an hour of constant combat without any breaks it's starting to feel like a chore. Once the sweaty city is over and dare you to lose, the game pretty much gives you the finger, with rewards not really worth your input. If you manage to get good bags, that might redeem it, but god forbid you roll bad and get zero bags, leaves you with pretty shitty fealing. So with something like every 1/20 city is actually fun, I just can't bring myself to queue even though it usually is worth the time in terms of warcrests per hour.

Had a couple hour long city once, where I was healing with shaman, rezzed like 50+ people during it, and was one of the top heal. I got zero bags and lost with crappy crests. Swore myself back then that I will never bring a healer to a city again

same

[Dackle]

Biggest issue with the game is it's matured. Nights/Days are pretty much set with what guilds are running warbands on what nights, and the other side knows it, so population seems to fluctuate in favor of the organized guild nights. Some people see that as faction flipping when honestly, I think a lot of it is natural play times have developed around these "organized" groups and their play times. Maybe some of the guilds should look at switching up their "scheduled" games nights.

Stacked 80+ guild groups with a Dev in it...

[Akalukz]

Biggest issue with the game is it's matured. Nights/Days are pretty much set with what guilds are running warbands on what nights, and the other side knows it, so population seems to fluctuate in favor of the organized guild nights. Some people see that as faction flipping when honestly, I think a lot of it is natural play times have developed around these "organized" groups and their play times. Maybe some of the guilds should look at switching up their "scheduled" games nights.

Stacked 80+ guild groups with a Dev in it...

I am sure that happens, Dev's play as well, which is good for the game. The gear gap is pretty large without a doubt, but it is easier to get than ever as well. They just need to add a dungeon that has Warlord Equivalent items.