Organized wbs and gamedirection

[navis]

Another option I had floated around by the community members that I have talked to is opening a 'side-campaign' during fortress sieges that closes after the fortress is captured or defended. This 'side-campaign' would function like T1 but in a T4 side lake. (IE; West Praag, Cinderfall etc) - would require a bit of development time, but I think it would be beneficial.

This sounds more like a special event kind of RvR thing. I would love to try that for a week or something but I personally don't feel it fits in with the campaign. Would be really cool, still

Spoiler:

[Ototo]

There is no other 4 capitals no maps no npcs nada it never existed and never will lmao EA shut it down before game release

Yeah, you are right, it is just my imagination... Oh, no, wait...

Click here to watch on YouTube

They are in the game files, just in case they had the time to actually complete them, which was not the case.

[Onemantankwall]

There is no other 4 capitals no maps no npcs nada it never existed and never will lmao EA shut it down before game release

Yeah, you are right, it is just my imagination... Oh, no, wait...
[youtube]https://youtube.com/watch?v=9ut_rIONJJ0[/youtube]

They are in the game files, just in case they had the time to actually complete them, which was not the case.

im glad your a dev who knows what hes talking about Oh, no, wait... you're not. Karaz's and 8-peaks shells were only done other 2 never even made the drawing board. And as mythic themselves said, its impossible to even begin to get karaz working for live server use let alone on a private server. Nice try tho if u used ur brain before you used ur mouth ud do alil research on stuff u blurt out "including the fact that we do have two of the four remaining fully built cities (Karaz-A-Karak and Karak Eight Peaks which are truly truly beautiful but would take months and months of optimization before they could match the changes we made to the game along the way" http://www.warhammeronline.com/

[wonshot]

ANY situation where a player is logged on and there is no active orvr zone available for him to be in is just a big fail, in my book.

What happend to "War never ends" "War never ends, but it can be put on pause"?

[Natherul]

Again I stress that this is not a permanent situation. It will change, and we are working to get that out as soon as we possibly can after we have accumulated the data we wish for with this test.

[Alfa1986]

yesterday the capture of Prag lasted at least 8 hours, then I left the game. what I want to say, when the forces are equal and the number of players in zone +- is the same, it is impossible to capture the zone and it can last for along time, which does not add interest and dynamic to the game.
I understand developers who are trying to eliminate situations when zones are blocked without defenders. but nevertheless in practice it turned out that the previous system was better.

[Ysaran]

Again I stress that this is not a permanent situation. It will change, and we are working to get that out as soon as we possibly can after we have accumulated the data we wish for with this test.

you should make it appear written after log in. Ppl seems not to read what is write here

[Alfa1986]

This decision was made to ease the transition to cities from a technical perspective. Eventually, this was going to happen anyways when we launch city scenarios. Now that we have the framework in place from a technical perspective, we can re-explore implementing creative ways of unlocking pairings, perhaps even contextually.

I haven't discussed this with the rest of the team - so anything below is purely speculation, but what if we unlock a T2-T3 pairing *that hasn't been captured yet* while a fort is going on?

The T2-T3 pairing that opens up would be one of the pairings that hasn't been captured in favor of a specific realm. If the fortress siege fails, the other pairing that opened up will close upon zone flip. If the fortress siege completes, the new pairing will stay open and the campaign will progress.

There would still be a situation in which the campaign could *not* unlock another pairing (IE; Dwarf/Empire locked, Elf in fortress) but most will be preparing for a city at that time when the last fortress is active, so I think it would be fair to lock everyone out for an hour.

Another option I had floated around by the community members that I have talked to is opening a 'side-campaign' during fortress sieges that closes after the fortress is captured or defended. This 'side-campaign' would function like T1 but in a T4 side lake. (IE; West Praag, Cinderfall etc) - would require a bit of development time, but I think it would be beneficial.

Last idea I had was to reduce the timer for SCs during fortress time. I don't want to do that, and it feels like a last resort/bandaid fix.

There is another solution , it is to open the fort for everyone and this is one of the easiest solutions. just make the fort the usual last zone of the rvr. then it will not be necessary to think what to occupy people who did not get to the fort (as they are now) playing t2, the whole faction will be interested in attacking / defending not only the fort but all the accompanying zones, 20-30 lvl, although they do not receive awards, but they get high rr , the only thing is POSSIBLE lags and freezes, and until you try it you will not know. it would not be bad to come up with a general bonus on the fraction that won at the fort.

[Wam]

Day 1

Raid delayed

20 CET... fortress ongoing 35 mins to go

Destro puggies being funnled and farmed in reikwald where everyone else is twiddling their thumbs with nothing else to do

35 mins out of 2-3 hours is quite alot of time lost when its suppose to be the most active period of day.

Also Lowbies will be pushing zones then locking themselves out of game
People who crash after fighting for hours and takes awhile will lose their spot
people who have played awhile and still didnt get enough contribution also get locked out

So RIP

for groups that want to team with each other and also just generally...

not good unless the aim is only for pug blob zergwars and embrace the funnel style (the most tedious part of game... where any 2 good guilds if in proper setup could hold vs 200 people no problem)

This system just encourages people to swap sides to the defender and just farm renown in boring way

and yes i know Test Test for who knows how long... but in a MMO where the system is designed and preventing players to group during the most busy time of day is pretty bad for its health as players will just find something else that doesnt prevent the basics of teaming and doing things together...

[wonshot]

Our guild had planned Warband raid tonight at 20:00 CET. Due to fort, we had to cancel because too much of raid time was being "wasted" on RvR-hungry players sitting in Altdorf unable to RvR.

I hear PnP, and now TUP being in the same boat.