Let's talk about... everything else
Equal sized fights is probably a fringe case in situations when AAO is at +100%, and the point of RoR is to defend and take keeps and BO in a team manner. If there is only one WB against 2 WB and the lower side wants to move supp as fast at least they'd have the ability to break their WB into multiple WB of smaller numbers. Additionally, 1 WB against 2-3 WB could put up a decide defense at a keep instead of getting insta rolled.
If you say that in usual fights in a rvr zone the participants on both sides are an equivalent of the general numbers in whole zone, I have to disagree with you. And even if you are correct, balancing the buff of main stats of the underdog would still be difficult. In fights (be it smallscale or langescale) burst is often more important than dps.
I'll imagine you were high on PCP when you typed this above opinion.
Reward the underdog side with high RR/XP, medallions and gear. Do not penalize and halt player progression.
User warned for this post.
Which brings us back to my point from a year ago.. Zone Wide AAO is broken. Zone wide AAO means that one side of a 6v6 gets no reward and the other side gets exponentially more rewards. Why? It's an even fight. Because Zone Wide AAO is punishing small groups for the sins of the Zerglings.Arbich wrote: ↑Mon Oct 14, 2019 5:14 pmThis proposal to buff stats always show up when talking about aao and its always a terrible proposal.
Mind you: when your side has 50 ppl and the other side has 100 ppl, that usually doesn´t mean that you always run as a 50 ppl blob and only meet the 100 ppl blob in open rvr.
There can be equal fights in open rvr, even when one side has a lot of aao. Thats why the at the moment implemented malus is bad. The players from the overpopulated side would get no rewards, even when they defeat enemies in a fight with equal numbers.
A buff to stats for the underdog realm would destroy this equal fights and encourage blobbing for the overpopulated realm (and in response also for the underdog).
It is my understanding that Morale gains used to be based upon number of enemies in the "area" of the player. If this system was in game, why couldn't this same "Area" check be used to adjust AAO? If 24 players run into 12 players and fight, if morale gains were being adjusted for the smaller side to be higher gains to compensate for the disadvantage, why couldn't the AAO be adjusted in the same way?
A pair of WEs with 400% AAO can completely wreck a solo player riding for or from a warcamp, running supplies, and receive bonus to renown gains of astronomical numbers. Under an Area AAO ( call it AAAO) system, they would net 50% of the standard renown( in a 2v1 situation) if they win. The converse, using the AAAO logic is also true: A 2v1 sometimes works out in favor of the 1, and wouldn't you want the reward for successfully engaging and winning a 2v1 to be commensurate with that amount of skill and work? Why not reward that player with a 150% renown tick?
In all transparency, I must state that I have been told that this area check cannot/will not work for AAO, but it seems like the only way to have a working AAO system that is fair to everyone in every fight. If AAAO can be implemented, it would encourage the small, organized groups back into the lakes looking for other small groups to fight and punish those large groups blobbing through the zone looking for zerg kills... the way it should be. If it can't be done based upon the limitations of the software, so be it. That said, if renown gains were somehow adjusted based upon an area check, couldn't somebody with real programming skills adapt that area check?
I fully expect to be ignored, but at least I got to explain my theory of how to break up the zerg, reward breaking up the blob, and do so in the most fair way I can see.
Is for fools who prefer to zerg, if they happen to be on bigger faction, instead of seeking for interesting and challenging fights.
Dying is no option.
Weird thing that you bash realm pride while 90% of the time the ones who fuel the zerg more are xrealmers.
"Oh no no you are playing the faction you like? What a god damn zerg you are!!"
It's all good folks, devs don't care and won't change it. It's a waste of my time to play the characters I love the most when I get 1 RR a kill and that's why we quit. Server pop going down since I last played anyway. Sucks that the team hasn't learned from their mistake of not listening to the player base and keep losing players because of it(I mean.... other than the unmentionable actions of the team for those of us who played the longest)
You love to play in a zone with twice as many players on your side? You find it fun to steamroll the enemy? What a challenge, no?Silverbow100 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 15, 2019 6:53 pmIt's all good folks, devs don't care and won't change it. It's a waste of my time to play the characters I love the most when I get 1 RR a kill and that's why we quit. Server pop going down since I last played anyway. Sucks that the team hasn't learned from their mistake of not listening to the player base and keep losing players because of it(I mean.... other than the unmentionable actions of the team for those of us who played the longest)
Dying is no option.
I seriously can't figure out why people think you should receive full rewards for being part of a zerg. it's only the individual kills renown that is being "nerfed" If you were truly after the fight, wouldn't you be rolling the underdog side anyways? People say it's not about the renown, it's about the fight...um then what's the problem? I vote to keep the Malus, if anything I would take a it a step further to figure out how to punish those that flip sides to be on the zerg side, or possibly put in a pop cap on the zerg side.
-= Agony =-