Recent Topics


Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

We want to hear your thoughts and ideas.

Moderators: Developer, Management, Web Developer

Forum rules
Before posting on this forum, be sure to read the Terms of Use
Posts: 2

Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#1 » Tue May 26, 2020 5:14 pm

As the title suggests, this conversation is aimed specifically towards the end game currency and the current End-game design features (Forts and Cities). There has obviously been a lot of discussion on the forums about these topics recently for which I believe to be well warranted discussions. However the following are a few things I have noticed from either being a player or speaking with long time players. This is meant to begin a discourse which can hopefully revitalize players to the game and incentivise their time. (Focus on RvR not SC currency).

Firstly, let's look at the current endgame currency, Invader/Royal. These are obviously only obtained for the endgame content which is fine and understandably the only way in which to obtain them. The recent implementation of invad/royal to purple/gold bags is a nice little 'bonus'. For myself it took me about 7 zone flips to obtain one of those bags. Others I have spoken with in various discords have stated anywhere from 4-8 flips on average. Then there are of course the normal means of fort/cities to obtain these.

- My suggestions to the current currency is like with RvR currency is allow up/down grade of these. I am not saying Vanq up to invader. Simply allow invader and royal currencies to be up/downed with themselves. The conversion can be played with but with the exceeding rarity of these items a possibility of 3:1 invader to royal ratio would not be outside the realm of reasonable. Even keeping the standard 5:1 is fine, just allow the usage of invaders once you are past needing them. This method does not 'create' tokens out of nothing and incentivises players to compete in forts instead of the current trend of city logging.

- A second suggestion to the current end-game process of 'currency grind' is implementing a quest system similar to the SC quests. Installing a lock out based or weekly based rotation of quests in which the rewards scale with your current RR could add some flavor to the game besides push for city. Or it can be a method of getting players back out into the lakes and doing T2/T3/T4 content. Rewarding players for playing the game the way they already do can alleviate the stress of "city grinding". The rewards do not have to be massive, complete 3 tasks get 5 currency of your current RR. The quests could be to capture a zone, kill X player, Turn in X supplies. There are already lockouts in place for dungeons, these quests could be done as lockouts so you wouldn't have to 'grind' them at the start of every cycle. The Weekend Warfront have been a massive success from what I have seen and have brought a lot of competition to SCs, so a similar reward system might be favorable.

Secondly, the City itself. I would like to state that I really do enjoy city content. the 24v24 fights are rather fun and exciting game play. The main problem is the current trend of city times and que pops ( Regardless of faction). The past 4-5 cities (From the time of writing this post) have all been IC and roughly 3-5AM NA and Midday EU. I am not complaining when the cities I am just stating that from what I have been able to tell this is when the server pop is fairly low, or is faction dominant. This leads to a number of issues. First, a large number of the player base is not able to experience or compete in the established endgame content. Second, if the server is at a low pop rate or dominant faction than queuing numbers will be low and those who were available to push for city can not even reap their rewards. I myself and many others that I have spoken with have unfortunately dealt with these issues multiple times. it is not fair for the player base to literally schedule their days around a game. It is not healthy or should be what is intended. This has lead many people to grow disdain towards the game and quit because they feel that there time spent pushing zones, flipping keeps, or capturing forts is pointless because they do not get a que or they log off to rest and a few hours later a city happens and they are right back to square one.

- My first suggestion for cities is to implement a PvE city after the PvP lockout timer has concluded. This will allow the remaining qued players a form of content and reward for their time. It should obviously be a difficult encounter and should require some level of coordination and mechanic play. I myself did not play WAR live, however, numerous times have I heard of a PvE City. Those who played in those Cities speak extremely highly of those moments and leads me to believe it should already be in the existing game files. Now the issues with missing this magically City que time. There is already a recovery phase built into the game currently for the Besieged city. Roughly 8 hours, I believe. With the Besieged status being there leave open the opportunity for players to que into the PvE scenario for that time frame. This will greatly alleviate the time constraint of having the be online within the small 30 minute time window. Especially when there is only one server for a global player base. To even spice up the content at the last 30 minutes of the 8 hour besieged allow a second round a PvP queuing. This can also be an avenue for players to actually play their alts or incentivise the usage of alt characters. Every character will have a lock out on rewards (Just like dungeons). The payout for the PvE city can also be slightly reduced if that makes it more fair. 70-80% of the typical payout. Even though, this will allow a vastly larger amount of the player base to play the current end-game content.

To finish up this post, whether my suggestions are heard, ignored, liked, or loved I would just like to hear some feedback. The current system of the game is leading to a large amount of players being felt left behind. I myself have had friends, guildies, and others leave this game or begin to feel burned out because of the current end-game. If nothing else, maybe just a response as to what the direction the server is going?

Thank you for your time.

Posts: 46

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#2 » Tue May 26, 2020 6:25 pm

Something needs to revamped especially for casual players. Daily and weekly repeatable quests with a check list could be something to think about. I seen this work very well in SWTOR. Hardcores still get their edge and supremecy over most players...while others at least can get base rewards of time played. At least in the long run every player are able to progress. Casuals should get half of the handouts that 24/7’s get. Keep in mind that most play this game to ORVR and will keep pvping in endgame gear. Therefore this shouldn’t be an issue where other MMOs face boredom. Have faith in the pvp model and don’t rely on gear progression to keep players interested. That is the test to longevity of a MMO.

Posts: 4

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#3 » Tue May 26, 2020 9:14 pm

I love suggestions. The way I figure, depending on the stars of a city and number of bags you get for contribution, you could end up with what? 3-26 royals per city? Cities generally happen once per day, albeit usually 3-6am NA time. If we could implement a grind comparable to the number of royals you could feasably get per day, depending on what you do, it would rule out city logging. I thoroughly enjoy playing my dok heal but I find myself mostly playing small man roams because rvr is too much of a hassle to deal with 200 "idiots" (including myself) with a zerg mentality just for a 5% chance of 1 royal. Then, I am just setting up the city for Other people in other time ones. I don't get to do it myself.

Don't get me wrong, RvR is fantastic. The people are not. If I was properly incentivised to do it, I would be more willing to push.. And I suspect others would as well.

Posts: 2

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#4 » Tue May 26, 2020 9:37 pm

Just a small clarification on to what I was intending on this post.

This is not a 'Gimme more stuff' type post. These suggestions are meant to help more players be able to play and compete in end-game content. The currency changes and currency style quests are simply there to help incentivise some players time as well. It is not unheard of that some players want to be rewarded for their time. Those changes can help reward their time and can help the more casual players stay somewhat 'caught up'. 5 RvR currency per lockout (3 days lets say), with some simple math, is roughly 10 per week if no bags/forts/cities are obtained. That is not insignificant but it will also not be a huge change towards the amount needed for end game gear. Invader needing ~220 and one Sov setting need ~400-420. With the ability to upgrade invaders to royals more people who are full geared with invader will find use of forts if all they want is the reward from it as well, thus leading to hopefully more organized and geared fort play.

The changes to city are not for more opportunity for rewards of invaders/royals that is simply a byproduct of more opportunity to compete in end-game.

Posts: 250

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#5 » Sat May 30, 2020 8:54 am

Weekly epic quests gets my vote... It drip feeds the gear to casuals and hardcores at the same pace much like WoW raid weekly lockouts.

Or try to find a design that allows city pushes to work during prime time hours so all timezones see a daily city.
Destruction - Pain and Pleasure Guild
Defrack rr73 Mara
Defraz rr81 Magus

User avatar
Posts: 67

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#6 » Sat May 30, 2020 2:05 pm

Bring back crest drops from high rr players; on live i didn't go to a single fort or city, but i had full invader and half warlord. I did have full Tyrant gear though.

User avatar
Posts: 130

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#7 » Sat May 30, 2020 2:09 pm

empmoz wrote:
Sat May 30, 2020 2:05 pm
Bring back crest drops from high rr players; on live i didn't go to a single fort or city, but i had full invader and half warlord. I did have full Tyrant gear though.
^^ aye, bring "low" chance of end game currency to drop from high RR players, will makes more going RvR.. instead of sitting in city and wait for keep/fort/city push.

Posts: 9

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#8 » Sat May 30, 2020 3:17 pm

I'm fine with the pace we get gear at, but I really dislike how there are large periods of time where it's just not fun to play. Once we get to 500v500 in oRvR there's no reason to go out there, especially with how terrible forts have been recently. I think they're the biggest problem right now and that they're driving people away. Hoping for the other side to throw, get bored or get hit with a big DC is not good for the long term health of the game.

It feels like the number of players is steadily declining, and it's understandable why. I try to play different roles to stay entertained, and I really like playing in guild warbands, but I've pretty much given up on any rvr content outside of that. Having a 40 minute fort you know is destined to fail feels terrible, while I rarely get any sense of accomplishment from winning a fort siege. Cities are great content and I wish we could get them more often, even if there was some variant where we would not get royals or have the number of royals we can get capped. I was told by some veteran players that forts were removed from the retail version and I think that might be a step in the right direction for ROR.

User avatar
Posts: 12

Re: Invader/Royal Crest and End-Game Design

Post#9 » Sun Jun 07, 2020 5:33 pm

Every city I have played so far has been at around 4 am. I feel like quitting since the end game content only occurs at a time I should be asleep. Wouldn't mind the currency grind if I could actually play the activities that reward you with it.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 7 guests