Recent Topics

Ads

Feedback: City Siege

Let's talk about... everything else

Moderators: Developer, Management, Web Developer

Panodil
Posts: 190

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#21 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:18 am

Best part about logging defending realm is that you have one hour to fix WB, and you will fight the scrubs who didnt get in ;)
Panodil WP
Panodill DoK
Panodilz Zealot
Panodilr Runepriest
Run Shaman
Panage Archmage

Ads
User avatar
xpander
Posts: 112
Contact:

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#22 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:22 am

Why should i have to play the other side if i only care about 1 side, not all have characters on boths sides and dont xrealm. If i wasted loads of hours in the zones to defend and push our realm, then i dont just simply switch to other side chars.
Would be nice imo to get the reward to pillage the other realm's city. If its empty there should be some other mechanics, like someone mentioned, some PvE crap even would work and without the crest rewards then maybe.. or maybe just 1 crest.

User avatar
Wam
Legacy RR80
Posts: 509

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#23 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:30 am

xpander wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:22 am
Why should i have to play the other side if i only care about 1 side, not all have characters on boths sides and dont xrealm. If i wasted loads of hours in the zones to defend and push our realm, then i dont just simply switch to other side chars.
Would be nice imo to get the reward to pillage the other realm's city. If its empty there should be some other mechanics, like someone mentioned, some PvE crap even would work and without the crest rewards then maybe.. or maybe just 1 crest.
if you only care about one side then you do not care about balance...

you think you deserve end game gear for beating enemy 2-1 then fighting nobody?

Yes its harsh you miss out on this ocassion, everyone will miss out on some occasion... the more people zerg the more people will miss out

until one side stops zerging and more balanced is obtained will always be this way ... someone will miss out and be unhappy about it ... when a solution has been given , you chose to ignore it and roll the dice. 200+ vs 100 is not normal numbers for NA .
Wamizzle Guild Leader [TUP]
Wamizzle Guild Leader [The Unlikely Plan]

User avatar
Alfa1986
Posts: 331

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#24 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:44 am

Unfortunately, this problem cannot be solved at all. in order to get new equipment you need to arrange a city siege, the fastest way is when one side refuses to fight, and the other without resistance to capture all the zones and the fort. the system encourages that one side to simply give up until the city siege sets in to obtain royal crests for new equipment, becouse there is no an opportunity to get it another way.

User avatar
Wam
Legacy RR80
Posts: 509

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#25 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:02 am

Alfa1986 wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:44 am
Unfortunately, this problem cannot be solved at all. in order to get new equipment you need to arrange a city siege, the fastest way is when one side refuses to fight, and the other without resistance to capture all the zones and the fort. the system encourages that one side to simply give up until the city siege sets in to obtain royal crests for new equipment, becouse there is no an opportunity to get it another way.
if people payed close attention to state of realm and the numbers... you already saw this behaviour previously with t2 being dead, t3 being dead, t4 middle being semi active, and if one side gets momentum and servely outnumbers the other , the numbers just keep going up and up and zerg to fort for invader farm... forts use to kill server pop when campaign reset, no progression for people they avoid t2/t3...

I've seen 100+ people appear on destro just because they got a sniff that potential fort was on the cards and destro had momentum...

Cities will magnify this as like you said end game gear is behind a wall, but that is the way it is... and people will be bitterly disappointed if they always pick to play the side with the most numbers when there is little opposition...

its like some people here never played on live or are totally ignorant of the issues of Tilted servers and are too blinded by how shiny new loot is.

We have one server, dev's will do their best to keep it as fairly balanced as possible without it being tilted... tilted servers kill the game... Zerg fan boys need to understand that. Server health comes before loot. If you tilt the server, you kill the one sides community (both sides need each other, and underdog needs more zergers to swap sides... the more that swap sides the more people will get a instance and the shiny loot they crave)... what good is your loot if you have no one to fight against and use it versus? Common sense and logic seem to be missing when new loot is applied.
Wamizzle Guild Leader [TUP]
Wamizzle Guild Leader [The Unlikely Plan]

User avatar
Wdova
Posts: 444

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#26 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:02 am

Alfa1986 wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 9:44 am
Unfortunately, this problem cannot be solved at all. in order to get new equipment you need to arrange a city siege, the fastest way is when one side refuses to fight, and the other without resistance to capture all the zones and the fort. the system encourages that one side to simply give up until the city siege sets in to obtain royal crests for new equipment, becouse there is no an opportunity to get it another way.
That is why contributon system exists. You give up, stop fighting and let other side zto take zones? Ok, but you lost your contribution for fort and city.
Active
SM - Hajzl 40/7X
Kotbs - Valdstein 40/6X
WP - Wdova 3x/3x
Choppa - Pigbutcher 40/6x
Inactive
Slayer - Lokomotiv 40/7X
BW - Pyromanka 40/6X
DoK - Vdova 40/4x
WH - Vevoda 40/5X

havartii
Posts: 102

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#27 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:28 am

I think the Devs have made the right decision, you can't force people to play one side or another. But you can make over populating one side to farm gear harder. I say make the spoils reflect the aao. Even more rewards to those who fight against the zerg. The bigger the zerg the more rewards to the defenders.

User avatar
xpander
Posts: 112
Contact:

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#28 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:33 am

Yeah, in the end i think its fine system currently. Zerg just can't participate as easily. The problem is not the City itself, but all the zones. If theres equal populations on both sides, it will be nearly impossible to take the zones anyway. Unless 1 side has really good premades ofc.

Still would be nice to step into the opposite faction city though, even without the rewards, maybe to do the dungeons there :) ...

Ads
User avatar
Ototo
Posts: 1015

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#29 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:37 am

Wam wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:57 am
Spoiler:
Onemantankwall wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 8:15 am
Wam wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 7:56 am


good call... or zerging will get even more out of hand than it currently is

Dev's have to draw a line in the sand somewhere... 200 vs 100 is not fun for pugs... shouldnt be fun for organised either if you are on the heavy pop side...

Play both sides, play underdog and you will get rewarded... zerg and you run the risk of no reward... that seems the best case solution out of all the possible alternatives ... or NA is going to be serverly imbalanced in the future with the rest of world players taking path of least resistance and overstacking a side to victory even more than currently happens.
Maybe if eus wasnt on 3 am coatailing both order and destro :P (JOKING!!!)

it'll eventually balance out once people stop staying up 3 am to farm carrots.

tbh destro completely sped push zones just to reach city first so doubt ull be seeing city as early as 3am anymore maybe more 5-6ish.

This outcome has been known forever now zerg won't be given empty instances as loot pinatas maybe while qued should of took reikland and reikwald. You dont physically have to be at city gate once qued.
hahahaha Ive played both sides, i know how it is, i know i was super outnumbered on order one night in two forts and got 0 invader for defending... despite solo tank walling top of ramp in lords for a minute against continous sea of red... and then i've also pug lead in na time and mt'd a couple times... and I see familar names from EU there too and new NA names i got more use too. But i don't make thread about where is my invader like i am entitled when things bug out or you been so outnumbered and wasn't completely ready to milk the contribution, sure frustrated because outnumbered and should of had a reward for doing the right thing but **** happens that is life and part of game...

I expect heavy pushing on campaign from some organised destro guilds... destro has better coverage generally, but if order have enough online they can stop them... but stopping them then they dont get new shiny reward/gear ... so there is alot of "gamesmanship" to be done... like how hard are people going to defend forts compared to previously when it was the end game... and how more frequent are zones going to be thrown or traded... will be interesting to see, its going to happen but on what scale. New gear sometimes brings out a resurgence in order also but don't think they can maintain it vs destro's coverage which ultimately demoralises them as a realm...

In ideal world wouldnt need to play order, but sometimes they need more numbers so instead of kick them when down, you need to close eyes and imagine order tanks look as cool as destro tanks and search for action.

What happens in the first 2 weeks doesnt matter with all the hype and training going on... its 2-3 weeks from now like you say when things die down and should get back to normal, what will that new normal look like, and how badly are loot hunters going to destabilize NA time than it currently is... are they going to continue to all stack destro and gamble for their chance of loot in city? then complain when they are the unlucky ones for chosing that fate.

220-100 is more than primetime EU has gotten recently on some nights...




This comment brings up a thing that has been deterring me from defending Forts in NA prime. There is literally no point to go there and basically feed the zerg realm, cause due to your realm being so vastly outnumbered you have no chance at all to enter a contribution, hence you go there as a renown reward for the enemy zerg without a reward for you. I would really like to see a system that rewarded the heavily underpopulated realm. Like if lets say your realm has 80-100% AAO, not unusual in NA prime, you get the Invader medals for pretty much 1/4 of the contribution threshold that is currently implemented. As it is right now, there is no incentive to defend, or even enter, a Fort when you are the underdog, cause you play for zero rewards.

For the rest, agreed with this post and dev team position: Zerg should never be rewarded, and that is what happens in NA prime.

They say "we worked hard"....... hahahahahaha!!! I was there. It was a freaking destro tide in main attack zones. No work at all. PvE keeps and Forts. I was so bored (was playing destro) that when there was no more side zones to pick, I logged in T1. I had zero interest in a city siege like that. And guess what? T1 was exactly the same, so I simply logged out.

I have no idea how people can come here with balls of steel to say "we worked hard".... you literally did nothing. Zero, nada, empty, vacuum. Nothing. You PvE your way to city, so don't expect RvR rewards for it.

So maybe this idea should be taken into consideration:
havartii wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:28 am
I think the Devs have made the right decision, you can't force people to play one side or another. But you can make over populating one side to farm gear harder. I say make the spoils reflect the aao. Even more rewards to those who fight against the zerg. The bigger the zerg the more rewards to the defenders.
Spoiler:

User avatar
Wam
Legacy RR80
Posts: 509

Re: Feedback: City Siege, a failure?

Post#30 » Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:38 am

xpander wrote:
Sun Feb 09, 2020 10:33 am
Yeah, in the end i think its fine system currently. Zerg just can't participate as easily. The problem is not the City itself, but all the zones. If theres equal populations on both sides, it will be nearly impossible to take the zones anyway. Unless 1 side has really good premades ofc.

Still would be nice to step into the opposite faction city though, even without the rewards, maybe to do the dungeons there :) ...
Speaking of side things in the city... Gotrek & Felix make cameo appearance in The Screaming Cat tavern in Altdorf.

I remember this on live at the start, and it dropped nice purple crit chest for bork atleast.
Wamizzle Guild Leader [TUP]
Wamizzle Guild Leader [The Unlikely Plan]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Frostbitw, Google [Bot], MSN [Bot] and 25 guests