They tried this idea with invaders back before cities. It just lead to sides giving away middle zones so they could take the next zone and get an invader.tvbrowntown wrote: ↑Thu Jun 10, 2021 1:36 amNo reason to defend a fort from a city push when everyone in the game wants royals. Could make it so the defending side of a city push (just before sieging a city) gets to roll for Royals on a successful defense. Attackers will only get Invaders - but they open the city should they win to get the chance at Royals. Should give people a reason to defend against their city being sieged - because it will benefit them and hinder the other realm.
If you implement this idea though you MUST find a way to make forts more interesting/fair tactically. Seems like destro struggles to push in most the time cause Black Orcs are too big to squeeze past, lol. There has to be a way to split up the nascar nature of fort sieges.
Before they implemented forts, keep sieges were fun. People defended to the last, no one threw zones, and it was all about realm pride. Gatelocking gear behind certain types of RvR only leads the playerbase to try to unlock that type of RvR as soon as possible - joining overpopulated side, throwing a zone, being "that guy" with the siege ram, etc.
My suggestions
- lower city and Fort token rewards a bit OR increase orvr token rewards. Let the players choose how they want to get their gear. No more solo queue pubstomps - they won't bother cause they can just go fight in the lakes while you wait at the city gates hoping for a pop.
- make BOs mean something during sieges. Spawned NPC defenders in keeps for defending side, additional siege equipment ammo and damage for attackers - something besides just more boxes to run.
- implement Trippie's suggestions. The playerbase always wants more shinies. Shinies at keeps would be fun. Half the reason WoW was so successful was because they understood this early on and catered the hell out of their game to collecting **** so your Tauren has the coolest threads on the block.