Recent Topics

Ads

Fort. suggestion

Let's talk about... everything else
User avatar
Alfa1986
Posts: 542

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#11 » Wed May 29, 2019 1:43 pm

Bladepower7 wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 10:27 am
Alfa1986 wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 10:12 am I understand that the topic starter is unhappy with the fact that some players refuse to protect the last zone in front of the fort and even help the opposite side to speed up the process of collecting medals. but the reasons for this occurrence are not correctly indicated, as they are as follows:
1 . in the process of capturing a fort, there is only a limited part of the community, the rest at this time are simply thrown out of the game process.
2. The fort's fortress or successful defense of the fort does not affect the faction as a whole, but is important only to those who collect inv medals.
3. The capture is carried out by a zerg, and a less numerical fraction cannot provide at least some strong resistance.
Personally, I'm on the side of the ppl that hope the enemy will win to get my Invader chance, as I said in the first topic I respect all the ppl that wanna defend for whatever reason, and I always join them even if is completely useless in my opinion.
The problem is that I think it's weird to "hope" the enemy win because you get a better reward in defeat instead of doing your best to win.

Just my opinion, the game go ahead anyway, and soon or later everyone will have the Invader set.
Yes, I agree with you that it looks absurd when defeats are ultimately more profitable for defenders than a victory, on the one hand, this is solved very simply as I wrote,
1 . Do not give defenders a medal, only a limited number of bags depending on success / failure.
2. give inv medals to players (70-80 +) in т4 zones, it is not always possible, but with a certain chance of 25%.
then you get a situation that you can get more medals on the defense zone than on the fort, especially if the aspect ratio is 200 * 200, and also if you just give up and wait for the fort, then a situation is possible that you won’t win any medals at all, then in any case it will be more profitable to fight .
15th orks on a dead elf's chest
yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

Ads
User avatar
madmalky2014
Suspended
Posts: 158

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#12 » Wed May 29, 2019 2:54 pm

My main issue with forts is the domination by order which you may find strange as my main is order. I don't want to turn up do the flag run merry go round. Hit the Lord and get you're 3 crests its tedious. Destro players don't turn up because they know they are going to lose. For one i want a proper organized ding dong battle where its not just runnin down the clock. Need to find a way to balance it for the side that is underdog due to numbers.

Another issue is 16 to 40 players find rvr is for quite a time is unavailable to them its a bit of a pain you're forced to go to T1 or do pve.
This is an RVR based game we want to keep the lower ranks engaged which gives a reason to have a middle tier for players ranked 16 to 31 forts wont impact on their play. It also benefit the lower ranked players to hone their skills. It no fun being rank 17 to be beat up by the likes of me 73 rr SM by a couple of hits. I realise the devs are aware of population issues but it is in a healthy state just now may be the time to give it a try if it doesn't work alway go back to the present system.

User avatar
carmine3161
Posts: 159

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#13 » Thu May 30, 2019 3:28 pm

Bladepower7 wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 8:50 am
carmine3161 wrote: Tue May 28, 2019 2:51 pm
The system that we currently have in place requires these players to build contribution in the last zone in order to get a reservation to partake in the fort or be left taking a chance with the portal.

If you think these players are just letting the enemy take the zone on purpose then in theory they shouldn't be getting the contribution required to even get a reservation.
This is true in theory, but in the reality is pretty simple to cheat this, just skirmish during "supply phase" let them get 2 stars, go defense, focus them but never push or attack their ram, you'll get all the contribution you need (even just skirmish in the first phase is enough tbh) and still let them easy pass for the Fort. zone. I'm sure depends on timezone, I saw a lot of strong "realm pride" too
I'm sure you could most definitely cheat the system and contribution generators should probably be edited around a bit (which ones to edit idk since i don't know the numbers nor do i abuse them) but I've never seen your example demonstrated before so I'm not sure how coordinated people really are to abuse the mechanic.
Bladepower7 wrote: Wed May 29, 2019 8:50 am but is "stupid" for everyone and for both faction to do that
This is a issue that needs to be fixed for sure, all in all from what I see the system isn't abused as much as people think it is however easy as it may be to actually cheat it, but for it be "stupid" to defend your last zone to prevent the enemy besieging your fort doesn't make sense so I actually agree with Bladepower7's 2nd half of his suggestion.

To me it would make the most sense if the defenders actually got "4" invader medallions for successfully defending their last zone and pushing back to the middle. This would help give a reason for defenders to actually defend.

But will this create an issue where faction's don't want to push passed the middle zone? Because then they give a chance for the defenders to push back and get 2-4 invader medals and it would make more sense for them to wait for the enemy to push the middle zones so that then they can defend their last zone and get 2-4 invader medals.

So by implementing this invader on successful last zone defense I believe we just move this problem to the middle zones "why would we push?" because it would be better to defend for the 2-4 invader medals and as of late it seems to be easier or that you're more likely to defend forts from my own experience and others. So attacking the last zone to just have a chance at pushing forts with the possibility of getting kicked out and giving 2-4 free invader medallions or to actually end up pushing fort just to lose and give bags seems like a redundant system.

So we have a good reason for defenders to actually defend but then we don't have a reason for attackers to actually attack so to fix that people will probably suggest giving invader medallions to attackers as well but then all we've done is come full circle except we've just increased invader medallion gain which might alleviate only a bit of the issue. It definitely would be a better system because you can now get more medals with it and no one would hate that but I don't see any invader medallion increase happening for sometime since I think its intended for this set to be really grindy in its current state.

Or we somehow make attacking forts more attractive rather then rewarding them invader medals for taking the last zone but then we just create more problems. Might be better and or easier to solve though :P
Sybella SW 40/82(Lying in wait) | Quillbolt WL 40/83 |
My Videos My Twitch

BeautfulToad
Posts: 631

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#14 » Thu May 30, 2019 4:46 pm

I like the invader medals being given. Id like forts to be a big endgame event.

Have a scoreboard appear at end like in SCs, it seems like some scores are stored somewhere for the rolls at the end.
Everyone gets invader medallions, but reward taking a fort with better rewards (maybe more renown or inv medals, idk), but make forts harder to take.

70+ should be in forts because they are fun. I personally like seiges in RoR, though.

User avatar
anarchypark
Posts: 2073

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#15 » Thu May 30, 2019 7:36 pm

how about opening fort for 24h without barrier. like real orvr zone.
win/lose decided when timer end.
if lord die he respawn at city entrance side and patrol back to keep. defenders have to escort him.
or spawning lord requires 80g from guild, like keep claim.

ppl who play only 1hour in a day can join fort.
set a maximum gain to stop farm exploit.
u can help realm after reach max. ofc can't change toon.
win/lose condition is... idk.

sry i was bored.
SM8, SW8, AM8, WL7, KoBS5, BW5, WP8, WH7, IB7, Eng5, RP5, SL6
BG8, Sorc8, DoK8, WE7, Chs8, Mg8, Ze7, Mara8, BO6, SH7, Shm5, Chop4
SC summary - viewtopic.php?f=8&t=20415
( last update : 2020.06.09)

User avatar
Alfa1986
Posts: 542

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#16 » Thu May 30, 2019 8:35 pm

anarchypark wrote: Thu May 30, 2019 7:36 pm how about opening fort for 24h without barrier. like real orvr zone.
win/lose decided when timer end.
if lord die he respawn at city entrance side and patrol back to keep. defenders have to escort him.
or spawning lord requires 80g from guild, like keep claim.

ppl who play only 1hour in a day can join fort.
set a maximum gain to stop farm exploit.
u can help realm after reach max. ofc can't change toon.
win/lose condition is... idk.

sry i was bored.
It would be nice.
Very often the last time it happens that you enter the game, 2 directions are already completely blocked by the order, and the battle is going on in the fort of the third direction. it remains in such a situation either to go to t1, or to play scenarios, or to quit the game and wait a couple of hours until the evening rvr battle begins. either still pve, but pve is difficult to put together a group since most of the server players are at this time on the fort.
15th orks on a dead elf's chest
yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

User avatar
Ekundu01
Posts: 306

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#17 » Thu May 30, 2019 9:19 pm

I would say maybe change medals to drop based on renown rank you are and eliminate bags and medals for forts/keeps making rvr/scs the only way to get medals.

Make fort takes/defends give a bonus buff for the realm for a limited time that give a bonus to your realm for renown, xp, influence and medal gains for a set duration. Possibly find a way to split up the crazy zerging between zones and promote more of what we are all here for and that is fighting the other realm and not just flipping zones for the carrot.
Trismack

User avatar
TiberiusD
Posts: 378

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#18 » Fri May 31, 2019 3:35 am

I have been yesterday into a fort and since last one i did, it looks way different and here is why.

Prisons got changed - this is the good thing because people inside cannot be farmed and they cannot interact with the lever.

Camps - amazing stuff. You can respect and rest a bit without being scared that you can be farmed when you are respawning.

2nd stage point capture - works as intended. The more flags you get, the faster door is going down. So everything ok on this part

3rd stage. Now here it gets interesting. The newest strat is to funnel ground floor and not let the attackers enter. In my opinion is a good strat. Blocking the entrance to fort for them not to reach lord is good because on lord floor, postern got removed and you can easily attack their back lines. Now let's focus on ground floor. Ground floor is exactly the same like lord room was but without lord. There is only one entrance. I scouted the soroundings and found a couple of postern doors. Making those open will change the fight big time because peiple can think of something else besides atracking directly and die. If the postern doors will be removed, this will let people build better strategies and forts will be nice again. Removing all the posterns will make the forts less frustrating and enjoyable.

No one said that the road to fort is easy. The storm starts when players are in zones before forts. Some of them wants to go to forts faster and let the factions attack undefended keeps for some zone exchange and some wants to fight longer pushing zone to mid and back, making the war much longer than intended.

My suggestion is this. Remove postern door in forts, implement the siege abilities to players and increase the rewards so that players will find the battles less frustrating.

Ads
User avatar
Alfa1986
Posts: 542

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#19 » Fri May 31, 2019 4:16 am

oh my god, of course you have to open all the doors altogether, and it’s better to remove all the doors and walls, put the lord on a high mountain and play the king of the mountain. Why do we need castles and fortresses? explain! to make it harder for an attacker to attack, it’s easier to defend. so more by number than defenders, if you open all the obstacles and give them the opportunity to climb from all slots, then the defenders will have no advantage, and because of the greater number of attackers, the result will always be the same in 100 cases out of 100. when only forts were entered I was delighted, because finally new content appeared, now I think that it would be better not to introduce them at all, since at the moment they interfere with the normal usual habitual rvr.


although the idea of ​​capturing BOs while holding that decreases the life of the main gate I like, it would not be bad to try to implement this idea in a normal zones. then there will be at least some sense to capture the BOs and, most importantly, to hold them at least until the keeps gates are destroyed, or the opportunity to use the ram appears. this will force both the attackers and defenders to run more actively in the zone, and will make it possible to resist the zerg to a small but more organized realm.

I would add a multilevel zone capture,
Stage 1 - retention of BO, when control 4 Bo is reducing the life of the outer gate.
Stage 1. It all starts with the fact that each realm has a the keep and two BOs. Each keep has the protection of an outer gate, which does not allow a ram at the initial stage. when one side is simultaneously captured by more than 2 BOs, this protection gradually decreases, until it drops to 0 and the ram can be used to break the outer gate and to make a siege. protection is restored after 4 hours if the zone during this time is not blocked.

I think that if the strength of one realm is so great that it is able to constantly hold 4 BOs, then 30 minutes is enough, that is, every minute of holding 2 BOs, the defense decreases by 4%, respectively 1 b 2%. thus, in 10 minutes, the defense will decrease by 40%, in 20 minutes, 80%, which does not greatly prolong the zone capture time with a clear advantage of one of the parties.

Stage 2 - attack the outer gate with a ram, siege. when the gate is broken, they remain in this state for 2 hours, if during this time it is not possible to take the main keep then the gate will be rejected. that is, the usual customary siege
3 - seizure of a BOs that destroys the inner gate; during this time, everyone who wants to protect the keep can safely enter it without fear of being killed along the way.

This stage is necessary in order to concentrate the main forces of order / destro on BOs, and those who want to defend the Keep at the last stage could easily enter and organize defense. time for stage 3 is enough and 10 minutes. after holding the points, the inner gate breaks down and opens the way to kill the lord of the keep.

4 siege of the main fortress, and the murder of the lord of the keep.

in the main keep, it is necessary to remove the additional staircase from behind, or to make it very narrow, so that the defenders had a certain advantage over the attackers.

t each stage it is possible to prevent the more numerous order from interfering or seriously complicating the blocking of the zones with such ease and speed as it is doing at the moment)
Last edited by Alfa1986 on Fri May 31, 2019 9:58 am, edited 7 times in total.
15th orks on a dead elf's chest
yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

User avatar
DokB
Posts: 538

Re: Fort. suggestion

Post#20 » Fri May 31, 2019 5:12 am

Spoiler:
TiberiusD wrote: Fri May 31, 2019 3:35 am I have been yesterday into a fort and since last one i did, it looks way different and here is why.

Prisons got changed - this is the good thing because people inside cannot be farmed and they cannot interact with the lever.

Camps - amazing stuff. You can respect and rest a bit without being scared that you can be farmed when you are respawning.

2nd stage point capture - works as intended. The more flags you get, the faster door is going down. So everything ok on this part

3rd stage. Now here it gets interesting. The newest strat is to funnel ground floor and not let the attackers enter. In my opinion is a good strat. Blocking the entrance to fort for them not to reach lord is good because on lord floor, postern got removed and you can easily attack their back lines. Now let's focus on ground floor. Ground floor is exactly the same like lord room was but without lord. There is only one entrance. I scouted the soroundings and found a couple of postern doors. Making those open will change the fight big time because peiple can think of something else besides atracking directly and die. If the postern doors will be removed, this will let people build better strategies and forts will be nice again. Removing all the posterns will make the forts less frustrating and enjoyable.

No one said that the road to fort is easy. The storm starts when players are in zones before forts. Some of them wants to go to forts faster and let the factions attack undefended keeps for some zone exchange and some wants to fight longer pushing zone to mid and back, making the war much longer than intended.

My suggestion is this. Remove postern door in forts, implement the siege abilities to players and increase the rewards so that players will find the battles less frustrating.
Less frustrating and enjoyable for who? Attackers? The same attackers who already have artillery bombardment support as well as the security of the jail for any defender who happens to die outside a healers reach? Attackers already have so many advantages in fort, if you removed all the posterns then every defender might as well just AFK for their pity medallions (which many already do). God forbid a fortress actually favour the defender.

I know, let’s just leave a few convenient backdoors open in our gigantic fortress of death designed to be the final bastion of defence for our capital city. We’d hate for any attacker to be frustrated when they are storming the ramparts slick with the blood of friend and foe alike. But first, let’s fire the architects who left that backdoor in the lords room which makes defending oh so fun.

Let’s be honest here, fortresses are poorly designed and could do with some work. Removing more posterns isn’t the correct answer. If we did, defenders would have no leg to stand on.
Zoggof - Black Orc
Doinks - Ironbreaker
Leatherman - Blackguard

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ahrefs [Bot], leftayparxoun, Movrath, toutpix2000 and 49 guests