Recent Topics

Ads

Fort balance / Population / Fun factor / Fort design questions

Share your ideas and feedback to help improve the game.
Forum rules
Before posting in this forum, please read the Terms of Use.

This section is for providing feedback and sharing your opinions on what could be improved or changed for the Return of Reckoning project.

To ensure your feedback is as helpful as possible, please review the Rules and Posting Guidelines before posting.
User avatar
Wam
Posts: 807

Fort balance / Population / Fun factor / Fort design questions

Post#1 » Mon Apr 13, 2020 1:07 am

Fort balance / Population / Fun factor / Fort design questions

Ok firstly lets address elephant in the room... forts are problematic because they was designed for how the server use to be with 3 pairings open and maybe 200 players maximum on good days per a side if it was balanced. Now we get silly numbers like 800 vs 600 in one zone... and 300 defenders in one tiny lord room, and hundreds in the que. This creates numerous issues... the solution is to find a acceptable method to each of the problems.

The higher you increase the population cap the more it favours the defenders and the fort balance becomes insane and just a free farm for any defence organised or not... there will be so much bodyblock/lag and constant aoe pressure (not including morales) that taking the fortress becomes next to impossible and very defeating for the realm which does the hard work in pushing, so everyone will play the boring counter game wait for enemy to punch itself out and run out of energy / log off ... what is the incentive of pushing zones if the end result is going to be stacked unfavourably against you? If both sides sit and wait creates boring zzz stalemate rvr which is not very healthy.

There is also the problem with having gear which is padlocked behind this content... so you want it to be fairly accessable to the server when big numbers are out i understand and get this and not for people to freely skip content, but the more you increase the population cap for defenders (its very easy, i could defend any fort with 100 organised players would be overkill on either realm) this creates another problem of padlocking city content even more, and especially during high population timezones so EU gets shafted the most... where other timezones with less defenders will have a much harder time to defend and more likely lose.

So how do you solve this solution? how much do dev's want to redesign fort with new server in mind? how radical can it be?

This is just a suggestion, it might have some issues and might not even be possible... but for me forts are currently the worse part of the game, it is pure grind and funnel wars and a massive lag / crash fest and mindless napalm/rof spam... but they are the essential bridge to late game content. Would it be possible to make forts instanced at all? and reduce the population cap considerably in each fortress... so its a rough example 72 vs 48 (you can adjust as per your %) but have numerous instanced fort sieges at the same time... 3 warbands vs 2 warbands and if the attacking realm wins majority % then they lock the fortress for their realm ?

A slight issue will be win by not defending? well the first instance should always pop... then next instance should pop if enough defenders to meet criteria... so there is no empty free auto win instance for attacker (and i assume most people will want to defend/fight and get rewards (if people decide to cheese system by not defending, can always increase reward for defending if it is fair system in place on attacker). This way it should atleast feel more inclusive and your characters actions actually matter more than just zerging things down... people would need to organise que up more with proper warband setup (which would make them more ready for cities too). Less numbers can give some ST more importance instead of mindless aoe spam. At the moment we are all getting squeezed into one spot and throughout the server's history that has never really ended well with lags and crashes.

Ok if it is not possible for something radical like the above suggestion... which i think would really improve the fun factor and inclusivity. (defenders would have to earn their victories instead of just win by default which is the current status quo its too easy to defend with body block / lag and weak warband setups with only 3 healers)

Funnels... if you want to fit 300 people into one room, you need to have more access points than just two. I saw the potential of orcapult and that was fun, even if it was a test/gimmick... but it gives some MDPS a purpose more than they currently have... sit back watch rdps aoe spam, wait to push funnel and die or zerg enemy is not really fun playstyle for mdps...

Would it be possible to make more side entrances like the back postern? (still pretty easy to cover especially with 300 people)
would it be possible to widen the front entrance, and also the postern? (it will be harder for lower number pops potentially... but currently primetime becomes self defeating and that is pretty demotivating for the attacking realm and eventually boring... (why bother attack, let enemy punch themself out there is little incentive or fairness) If the above is not possible.... would it be possible to add multiple ladders on the side of the fortress to climb up to the higher levels? would it be possible to bring orcapult back as a permenent feature? we need variety / fun ways to break endless zerg / funnel wars... City is alot more fun than forts can ever be, because its about fighting if you get two equally matched sides and less slide show.

The current status quo of zerg around capture the flags on forts like nascar... build m4 push and hope for the best in lag / body block is a pretty lacklasture part of the campaign with its own knock on effects.

If we are talking about more radical revamping of forts... can we make more fun stages? like stage 1-2 is boring... can we not add event for actually breaking the outer walls? if you give enough defenders in fort they can funnel 3 outer choke points (results in same boring play as fort lord room) can we not have orcapults, and ladders to breach outer wall... or even potentially siege towers which warbands could instantly use to spawn on outer walls and storm the area ? give defenders some ballista to potentially counter some siege towers... a few siege towers should die if defenders are co-ordinated a few should breach because the attacker earnt the right to get there and needs some inniative...

Could we take some inspiration from stage 2 in cities with escorting NPCS and make this a stage in forts... if attackers get a NPC inside, can give bonus to the attackers like pulse aoe healing / pulse aoe absorbs as a semi counter for pugs and rof/napalm/pos spam and make the npc only attackable in melee on lord stage so defenders would have to come out to kill it if they want those benefits gone if they didn't kill it previously on escort stage.

next stage capture the flags... it is benny hill, maybe some more importance can be placed on fighting and killing? if attackers reach X amount of kills first then the lord or mechanic on final stage should be weaker (or diminishing rations as their supplies cut off) ... if defenders reach X amount of kills before attacker then give them oil (non respawnable) for both main inner, and upper main lord room (non respawnable) just some minor incentive for fighting and reward for whoever does better during this stage...

Lord stage... is it possible to reduce his agro range and make it more about the PVP over the PVE?

If you can make forts instanced and lower population per a fort instance... no need to add extra entrances... but if you want one big cluster zone fortress then there needs to be more even playing field for the attacker and not just a simply stand still aoe on 2 entrances where your own realm is going to get in your way more than the defenders actually do anything significant or noteworthy...

Anyways thankyou for reading... it was just some suggestions which hopefully can maybe spark and produce better ideas that lead to a better system than the one we have currently which is problematic and outdated as it was designed for smaller numbers than the masses we have now... and if invader is only way to get sovereign we really need a useful long term solution which is fun/fair on attacker and is in line with Dev goals and tools available for the campaign.

Cheers

Wam
Spoiler:
PS. if you want megazone cluster forts in current system please limit maximum defenders to 150-200 ... anything higher is trolling EU playerbase, and even then 150-200 is excessive as i could pretty much defend any fort with 100 organised players (1 proper organised wb(LOB ALLIANCE) on the postern, 1 proper organised wb (FMJ & TUP) in each corner funnel the front... 1FG(FMJ2) ranged dps harras the front from above, 1FG(FMJ2) ranged above harras the postern... 2FG (PHALANX) flexible rotating between front and back postern to morale bomb... 4 instant rez puddle merchants (DRWHO, TIGRR & 2 other shammies) and yeah good luck getting in... any pug group will die to normal dmg before they make it through door, and any organised wb will be melted with morales, this without any meat shield or overtuned NPC / Mechanic... ) morale of the story defending is too easy please dont make it easier as it takes the momentum and fun out of the campaign to win via default and not actually earn it.

All of Thundercats/beavers/vii and company combined would have a hard time breaking this, and pugs would likely get in the way and hinder more than help due to body block in chokes... because forts favour defenders that are bunkered, with line of sight and body block and npc / mechanics on their side once they reach a certain mass / damage per a second on the spot, it becomes a meat grinder with little counterplay.
Wamizzle Guild Leader [TUP]
Wamizzle Guild Leader [The Unlikely Plan]

Ads
User avatar
kirraha
Posts: 304
Contact:

Re: Fort balance / Population / Fun factor / Fort design questions

Post#2 » Mon Apr 13, 2020 9:35 am

I just do forts atm cause I had to. Yesterday was the worse ever due to the masssive amount of people. I usually don't lag in forts, but yesterday it was unplayable and not only for me.
Reason I highly dislike fort, is cause the only thing that matters is to chase the flags. You totally ignore being in a team and you run in circles or hide to cap as many flags as possible to maybe have a slight chance for a bag. And even if you have top contri, usually **** rolls will ruin all your hard work. So why even work hard at the fort anyway?

Wam sums up everything with fort. It is not fun to play at all. You just do it cause you have to if you want End-gear. Killing other players is not worth compared to chase flags atm. Just avoid fights, run and hope for a good roll.

This is just my thoughts of Forts aswell. Ofc we dont want easy fort wins, but we see a big issue with the massive population in them atm and for me the rewardsystem in some ways.

M0rw47h
Posts: 898

Re: Fort balance / Population / Fun factor / Fort design questions

Post#3 » Mon Apr 13, 2020 10:21 am

I still think Forts would be the best as 24 vs 24 SCs like City, but with extra 16-39 bracket.

User avatar
Bosli
Posts: 143
Contact:

Re: Fort balance / Population / Fun factor / Fort design questions

Post#4 » Mon Apr 13, 2020 10:27 am

kirraha wrote: Mon Apr 13, 2020 9:35 am Reason I highly dislike fort, is cause the only thing that matters is to chase the flags.
There are many things "wrong" with forts, but the contribution should not be the focus right now. Nobody should expect to get a bag at all with how it is now. If they manage to make forts "fun", it shouldn't be a problem that you have to do 220/5=44 forts total to get full invader.

User avatar
MMXX43
Posts: 225

Re: Fort balance / Population / Fun factor / Fort design questions

Post#5 » Mon Apr 13, 2020 11:44 am

Hello there Wam

I would like to add my pov here ( I like the current way forts go , just to make it clear straight away )
When you state " becomes next to impossible and very defeating for the realm which does the hard work in pushing" assuming pre fort zone
There are parameters to how the zone actually locked , chances are that it was either zerged , lag locked , or mega thrown, which must be added to the equation that describes the "hard work".

"Would it be possible to make forts instanced at all? and reduce the population cap considerably in each fortress... so its a rough example 72 vs 48 (you can adjust as per your %) but have numerous instanced fort sieges at the same time... 3 warbands vs 2 warbands and if the attacking realm wins majority % then they lock the fortress for their realm ?"
Hard yes on the instance , hard no on the unbalanced numbers . 24vs24 , 72vs72 and so on .If it is revamped in a sc way why make it unbalanced ? equal numbers work on city.

"(defenders would have to earn their victories instead of just win by default which is the current status quo its too easy to defend with body block / lag and weak warband setups with only 3 healers)" again , the defenders deserve to have it easier than the attackers cause of the above mentioned conditions that resulted in the fort siege ^ , also lag pushing lord room was omitted , far too many forts were lost that way.

"siege towers which warbands could instantly use to spawn on outer walls and storm the area ?" big fan of siege towers , been suggesting it in game for a long time now , the models are there for Empire , Chaos , Greenskins (not sure about Dawi Siege towers ) , but Hard No on the instantly part. + ladders would be epic .

"because its about fighting if you get two equally matched sides and less slide show." IF :P usually its not , even if equally matched , realms are unbalanced ( you said that yourself ).

"Lord stage... is it possible to reduce his agro range and make it more about the PVP over the PVE? " Hard no on this aswell , the Lord mechanics should be harder even instead of a tank and spank , where is the fun in that ? Am i the only one that misses City Lord instances ? wb vs King , see how many will fail there...

Now to end this mega post, so sorry about this :) Cities are still taking place daily , why the hurry for it ? Also , JAIL and POISON mechanics didnt get a mention and they are very decisive in forts and i mean VERY .In conslusion and always in my pov, forts are ok to me( poison mechanics included ). Yesterday destro was pushing Reikland ( mega lag bomb locked the zone ) before they were on the Lord , 2 organized guilds ( PnP Fmj ) went and ninja capped KV and took an empty Stonewatch + threw the poison , just to make sure.. :P , where was the fun in that Wam ? :) Then Destro failed in Reikwald and we had a nice eternity in Praag constantly countersieging each other which was glorious.I saw like 2 post similar to yours both by destro tbh ( Yes you Play Order aswell and all that ) and it feels like people want their sov ,which is ok, but they want them easy and fast which is a bummer :) Thanks for reading , take care

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 8 guests