Recent Topics


oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

We want to hear your thoughts and ideas.

Moderators: Developer, Management, Community Management

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.
Posts: 615

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#41 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:48 am

I think rewards need to scale with AAO. One invader medal in a fort at 80% AAO? Seems a bit miserly.

Posts: 48

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#42 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:52 am

MMXX43 wrote: Sun Jun 13, 2021 6:09 pm Half of the guilds that complain about zerging are the ones that mega blob . Pretense at its best. Your small scale kiting groups and aoe mega blobs are not here to be competitive, they are here to farm soloers and pugs dont even bother denying it, on the occasion of an organized wb entering the fray YOU ULTRA MEGA blob just to wipe it.....cause you are competitive and on the prawl for good fights........

Sure keep takes require a large scale commitment but to roam in lakes with 3 alliance wbs fighting 1 and a half wb or being a xrealm guild and sticking to the side that has more organized wbs and more people online is not competitive. Its you that is the problem. Of course the destro apologetics were not ommitted, no , you cant stack 2 cd red on your wb now , no you cant morale bomb in 30 secs now, you never really should have been able to.

Rvr is problematic now that NB is gone and some semblance of realm balance is on the move ? ( further nerfs should be implemented for destro, looking at maras and witches ).

And to catch the "IC on CD for months now mhkay! " posts , when is was Altdorf it was ok? Note that asides the NA popultion problems there isnt really anything of note going on here.
There is no feedback in your message, there is no suggestion. I wonder what was your intention when you posted it.
Trust me or not (i don't care if you don't) but some of the destro's feedback that you can read in Bombling's first post has been given before the huge nerf so it's clearly not about morale bomb nerf or cdr nerf. Here, the subject is not the class balance, it's about how the orvr become boring.

And more than that, you can read some suggestion in some of these feedback to make zerging not the only way to win.

User avatar
Posts: 984

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#43 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 12:51 pm

once again, let me underline the intention of this project and topic, is to give the Devs some insight in how the playerbase feel.

I asked the involved people about a very specific topic, asked them to the best of their ability to keep it only oRvR related and share how they see their guild recruitment, rosters, discord communities, how open RvR have affected them over the years and if this content is still appealing.

The suggestions forum is elsewhere, and this topic was only meant to serve as information and feedback, on an area that I personally feel the devs might not be too much in touch with.
If anything comes from this, is out of our hands. My goal, and our hope was simply just to share feedback.
Bombling RR 91 - Bombthebuilder 82 Engi - TheBombMan 72 Knight - Bombing 72 SL - Orderling 70 WP - Jackinabox 65WH
Gombling 85 mSH - Chopling 83 Choppa - Notbombling 82 Sorc - Powerhouse 80 Zealot - Goldbag 80 Mara - Smurfling 73 Sham - Blobling 62BO

User avatar
Community Management
Posts: 1187

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#44 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 1:45 pm

wonshot wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 12:51 pm If anything comes from this, is out of our hands. My goal, and our hope was simply just to share feedback.
Threads can spiral - but sometimes in the chaos ideas can come from it - don’t worry about anything in here coming as a reflection of your initial OP. People like to type things.

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

User avatar
Posts: 538

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#45 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:37 pm

To development of a new RVR system will require time, hard work and testing, and an incomprehensible result in the end. Take the NB ban as an example, it was discussed for several years and many came to the conclusion that this would be a very good and right decision (on the paper), but in fact, in reality, it turned out to be harmful decision, with incomprehensible and not fully defined consequences. In this game, during her life, many rvr systems were tested
(one of the most interesting and complex, in my opinion, was at the very beginning, when it was necessary to maintain influence in the zone, do pve, win scenarios)
, and in the end, only this one that is now survived. It's as simple as a bolt and a nut, and just as boring, but it works.

Holding the BOs would make much more sense if it gave various bonuses, albeit not large ones (for example, an increase in defense, attack or movement speed by 5-10%). but in the case where one side is overpopulated (and this is almost always), this leads to even greater dominance.
15th orks on a dead elf's chest
yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

User avatar
Posts: 104

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#46 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 8:26 pm

Alfa1986 wrote: Mon Jun 14, 2021 7:37 pm Holding the BOs would make much more sense if it gave various bonuses, albeit not large ones (for example, an increase in defense, attack or movement speed by 5-10%). but in the case where one side is overpopulated (and this is almost always), this leads to even greater dominance.
Keeping BO already give bonuses. But this kind of design is just icing. What you need to for good game design are:
- active mechanisms
- give a sense of epic progression,
- diverse means of winning so that the concept of "Strategy" provides significant depth to the game
- give elements of surprise so that a campaign becomes less predictable
- and eye candy, make the player feel different, recognizable.

Keeping BO is what is needed imho, starting by being obliged to capture them. Maybe this can be staged for example, like keep 0 to 1, no champ, then the difficulty increases from champion to hero at level 4, and then BO are harder and harder to win.

A great design is the one from Dawn Of War series with the concept of Requisition points ( ... ystem.html) where whenever you would take a BO, it would generate resources for your keep at a certain rate. The more you take, the more the rate increases.

Another interesting design is the concept of "Upkeep" ( which would either limit the zerg or zerg would be a conscious and strategic decision of the realm. What I mean is, from a certain number of players on the same front, the Requisition rate/resource pop would decrease, and/or it could be malus like +X seconds added on the resurrection timer, -5% heal, etc.

Something that have not be exploited enough in AoR and, consequently, in RoR are Realm Skills. The best realm skills is obviously the "keep passthrough" of MDPS and the ability to heal RAM. But what if they were more? Even better, What if you could buy them like a Moba build ?

I would love to see reward system for the best of side, the ones that stick to a realm and fight for the realm. I call it the "Realm Champion", where they would get a temporary armor, inspired from a sovereign (or tyran !), all shiny but explicitly distinguishable on the battlefield, with an aura, with unique stats, like a significantly buffed version of the regular sovereign armor. As I say it would be temporary and scarce so that it can be valuable, maybe based on a voting system (just like the survey you do from time to time). Could be the best of each class on both side.

For eyecandy: +1 to Trippy suggestion.
You could also give XP level to armor and weapons so that all armors and weapon can level to reach Invader/warlord level, along with unique bonuses so that it is meaningful to collect and combine the sets. I think the weaponsmith carrier has something similar in mind

Also, cherry on the cake, give the opportunity for a guild to go rogue for a limited period of time to introduce a natural element of surprise/disruption on the battlefield. This guild would fight both sides just for the fun, to regulate, etc. This kind of rogue parties/wb would not take any benefit from the campaign directly (i.e cannot lock, doesn't get RR/influence from RVR mechanism, etc.)

RoR: SW 82, AM Heal RR51
AoR: SW R87, BW/R60+, SM/40+, AM/R50+, WL/R60+, Slayer R40+, DoK/SH/Sorcerer R40+ (+others)

User avatar
Posts: 1251

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#47 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:01 pm

The problem with splitting up the zerg is that there needs to be multicondiational loss / win scenarios so both sides have to split up. If you require the attackers to maintain a force at all BOs then the defenders blob the keep and its a stale mate.

Put rams at 3 stars. Get rid of double ram at 4 stars, instead double resources if all bo's maintained. 5 stars flip zone. Most of the problem with ORvR right now is the speed at which 2 stars is obtained, and the lack of possibility to organize a true defense (rez in keep)

EDIT: for defenders at 4 stars if defenders maintain control of all BOs = rez in keep like old times.
-= Agony =-

User avatar
Posts: 104

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#48 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 9:52 pm

RvR has always been the meat and potatoes of WAR, thus it should be treated as such. It should be addressed from two fronts, core mechanics and rewards. There has been a lot of feedback on core mechanics of RvR so I shall focus on rewards. Progression is one of the cornerstones of MMOs, and should be taken into consideration when addressing issues. One of the main issues of RvR atm is that its just a gateway to get to city, so people can get gear and progess. Currently, there is not much reason to do open RvR once your character has reached endgame. This causes people to want to rush through RvR as quick as possible so they can progress quicker.

RvR should get similar treatment like ranked SCs did. You could have a weekly reward systems from influence that would reward with items that reset every week. This would give people a carrot to want to play RvR every week. You could also change the items for zone influence, sense it has not been updated and has low quality gear. Or perhaps even have them reset every week with new rewards to make people have a reason to be out in the lakes again.

These items could borrow ideas from both Ranked SCs and PVE such as the Sent ring with Tali that expires every week. These new RvR items would have less stats then those to still entice people to do PVE and ranked. This be would similar to how weekly SC event items and Ranked event item slots are handled, with Ranked event slot being BIS with more stats. PVE sent ring and ranked event slot would still be BIS, but it would allow people to get similar gear in RvR which would breath new life into it. Another idea but would require more time, is to add high RR gear and weapon as a side grade to Warlord. This would allow players to be able to progress in other forms besides just rush through RvR to get to City.

At the end of the day RvR is the heart and soul of WAR and should be treated as such. By adding more carrots and progression along with core mechanic changes, RvR will return to the Glory days of Conq/Vanq. Thank you for taking the time to read this and have a good day guys!
Last edited by SmackdownNinja on Mon Jun 14, 2021 10:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Voldro BG-85
Nuketown BW-82

User avatar
Posts: 927

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#49 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 10:12 pm

I am an NA located player and I have to say, NA pop is dead, don't bother balancing around it. Literally one regular 12 man would be enough to tip the balance from one side to the other.

Focus on making the game fun during EU primetime rather than a zergy stalemate first and then maybe address underpopulated times. I have to agree with some of the above who stated that the ease of getting to 2 stars for siege kills incentive to roam or move about zones.

Shout out to the OP for his efforts in putting these quotes together.
Brynnoth Goldenbeard (40/75) (IB) -- Rundin Fireheart (40/50) (RP) -- Ungrinn (40/40) (Engi)-- Bramm Bloodaxe (40/83) (Slayer) and a few Empire characters here or there, maybe even an elf.

Posts: 218

Re: oRvR feedback openletter from organized warbands

Post#50 » Mon Jun 14, 2021 10:18 pm

Honestly the best thing we could do right now is roll back the introduction of forts and cities. RvR was in best shape before their introduction imo - big pitched seige battles for control of a zone should be the pinnacle of what you're fighting for, not just as a gateway for the obsolete car crash that is forts, or to get to an instanced WB Vs WB scenario which is an absolute stomp one way or the other 90% of the time.

Leave cities in as the ultimate WB vs WB instanced scenario for the epeen if you want, absolutely noone will miss forts, and RvR goes back to having some meaning, rather than being something to throw so you can get your royals more quickly.

Stick a lockout timer on cities and let WBs queue against each other for a weekly royals bonus if you want, but they really have no place pretending to be the ultimate end game in a game where the RvR pitched battles and seiges had so much potential.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest