Recent Topics

Ads

FORTRESS: population limit problem and proposal

We want to hear your thoughts and ideas.
Forum rules
Before posting on this forum, be sure to read the Terms of Use

Structured class balance suggestions belong in the Balance Proposal subforum. Class-related discussion in this section are considered as ongoing debates and ARE NOT reviewed for balance changes.
boogerjames
Posts: 3

Re: FORTRESS: population limit problem and proposal

Post#11 » Mon Apr 06, 2020 3:45 am

jtj5002 wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 3:04 am That last Reikwald was messed up. There is no way that was intentional. 150 max defenders is around the sweet spot IMO. 200+ defenders makes defending very easy, especially when it had a messed up ration of ~ 240v260
I've also noticed this. Seems there is a sweet spot in numbers on the defending side for actually have a shot at taking the fort somewhere between 150-200. Over 200 defenders, it is pretty much impossible to take a fort no matter how many attackers there are. There is just only so many people you can try to squeeze through 2 small doors.

Ads
User avatar
Meinn
Posts: 16

Re: FORTRESS: population limit problem and proposal

Post#12 » Mon Apr 06, 2020 8:59 am

On the other hand, it's been a week since RvR is boring to die, the order to decide to defend in mass in the fortresses and keep them in general, even in numerical superiority, when they could very well go out and twist the area for them.

The only ones I see taking risks to go out and fight destruction outside keep is Seventh Legion (in organized guild) and some random people who try to move the area a little

Sorry for my english.

M0rw47h
Posts: 898

Re: FORTRESS: population limit problem and proposal

Post#13 » Mon Apr 06, 2020 9:32 am

I'd say - git gud, zerging zones shouldn't give you city. They are happening way too often anyway.

City is supposed to happen like once a week, not twice a day.

enzoneon
Posts: 22

Re: FORTRESS: population limit problem and proposal

Post#14 » Mon Apr 06, 2020 10:37 am

Sorry for the noob question, but isn't in everyone's interest to have a city siege? I don't understand what is the motivation to defend and stop the siege.

User avatar
Kaelang
Posts: 1275

Re: FORTRESS: population limit problem and proposal

Post#15 » Mon Apr 06, 2020 11:50 am

enzoneon wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 10:37 am Sorry for the noob question, but isn't in everyone's interest to have a city siege? I don't understand what is the motivation to defend and stop the siege.
Currently, you’re correct, on live there were more benefits for holding a higher level keep. These haven’t been implemented so technically it is in people’s best interest to get to cities as fast as possible.

That being said, we play the game for fun, and ‘realm pride’ I.E Destro > Chaos or vice versa, takes over.

Waaaaaaagh!
DiscordFacebookTwitterInstagram

I play around with Social Media, troll our players on Discord and officially hate anyone who plays a dwarf.

enzoneon
Posts: 22

Re: FORTRESS: population limit problem and proposal

Post#16 » Mon Apr 06, 2020 12:02 pm

Kaelang wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 11:50 am
enzoneon wrote: Mon Apr 06, 2020 10:37 am Sorry for the noob question, but isn't in everyone's interest to have a city siege? I don't understand what is the motivation to defend and stop the siege.
Currently, you’re correct, on live there were more benefits for holding a higher level keep. These haven’t been implemented so technically it is in people’s best interest to get to cities as fast as possible.

That being said, we play the game for fun, and ‘realm pride’ I.E Destro > Chaos or vice versa, takes over.

Waaaaaaagh!

I can fully understand that, just in my experience the majority is reward driven so I was wondering how it works but great to hear this :D

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests