Make Citys Q'able.(Royal Crests not required)

[Beara]

I play city for the fun of city. Seeing as it rarely pops while i'm online anymore, I suggest making it scenario. No need for the royal crest, unless you'd want to give them.(I'd suggest only 1 per q if you go that route so people still keep an interest in trying to push) Anyways, it's just a suggestion. City/Scenarios are why I play this game. Redundant forts and keeps and zone flips bore me. Trying to corral a bunch of people who don't know what they're doing into a discord(which you made it so I can no longer do in certain chats) is annoying. Honestly, I can't be bothered. I made the attempt, it wasn't fruitful.

But this way, you allow people to play city(and for those who complain they're disadvantaged in city, it would allow the chance to practice.) without having to wake up at 3am on a work day. I just love to play the aspects of this game I think are fun. I don't like being strong-armed into playing the bad parts. If people aren't interested in playing parts of the game, you should be asking yourself why and fix them. Honestly, forts are nonsense. It's like taking a keep, except you don't control the ram so what's the point. Flag capping? That's t1. Been there done that.

As stated above, I'm not asking you to break the game and give royals. It's unnecessary. I just want to play city as I feel it's the most fun thing in this game second to scenarios. I don't like the quantity over quality aspect of oRvR. Zerging to push zones for almost no renown due to AAO/Mal. I'd rather Q for city scenario and get the emblems or whatever. ****, you could even offer the new Ranked sc emblems for it since it's a scenario. Anyways, just a suggestion. I hear many people are only logging for city or whatever, so why not just give them city. No need to give them royals because you don't deserve royals unless you play the campaign, but locking one of the most fun parts of the game because you want to force people to play what I consider to be the biggest waste of time(Forts) is terrible. If you want people to play forts, make them fun.

EDIT: IF at somepoint in your response, you're going to ask for royal/invader crest, just don't even write that part. It's not gonna happen and it's not what this thread is about.

[Starx]

24v24 premade only SC would be pretty nice. Not really a fan of it being a copy of city though.

Don't even really need rewards, im sure warband guilds/alliances would use it to set up scrims and test things out.

[nuadarstark]

Hmmm, as much as I disagree with a lot of stuff you wrote, I think having a way to test and practice cities would be great. There is a bunch of elitist nonsense surrounding the cities and this could help do away with that.

[Beara]

Hmmm, as much as I disagree with a lot of stuff you wrote, I think having a way to test and practice cities would be great. There is a bunch of elitist nonsense surrounding the cities and this could help do away with that.

I, of course, can only speak of my personal experience, but i'd love to hear your feedback of what I wrote to gain perspective.

Also, I enjoy city, i'm sure other 24 v 24 scs would be great too, but I just really like playing city.

[toffikx]

I guess we’re talking about 24v24 premade scenario, not soloq/pug?
I think it could be interesting, with either city layout or something else, but i disagree with having no, or almost no rewards for it.
Creating a warband is a lot of hassle, especially if you will want to fight some of the better premades. So it should reward you accordingly.
Also, i’m betting 24v24 would be a niche thing like SoloRanked, so there need to be rewards in order to incentivize people to sign up.
Also, if forts gets some kind of rework (thinking mainly P3), they could be converted to instances like city with 24v24-36v36 fights.
Game is balanced round 2-6 and 12-24 man content, so why not build upon the success of city fights and create more opportunities for 24v24 combat.

[kmark101]

Proposed a doable solution for this here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=38537&start=90#p416055

[Beara]

Proposed a doable solution for this here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=38537&start=90#p416055

You missed the concept. I don't want to have these scenarios have anything to do with rvr or progression. They are scenarios in which you'd play the city sc in a 24v24. I don't care about royals, I don't care about sovereign. Yes they could reward you with normal sc emblems or with ranked emblems. But my idea is to get to play fun city scenarios without having to deal with the Rvr. oRvr is terrible in my opinion unless you have no life to sit and play the game for 10 hours at a time. Unfortunately, i'm an adult, with a full time job. When I play this game, it's for fun.

This is not about progression, this is about playing a fun aspect of the game that's walled off. I'd sacrifice rewards for the chance to play city because I think it's fun. This would also allow guilds to set up and test group comps for when actual city pops happen. It is NOT, I REPEAT, is NOT a way to get royal crests or find a loophole to get city equipment faster. At most it should offer the ranked sc emblems, if that.

Please stop trying to get rewarded for nothing. The devs(or one dev in specific that I've seen) has made it clear that's not going to happen and I agree with it. That being said, I like city and I would like to play it without investing 6+hours of time I don't have. I have a life, so when I have leisure time, i'd like to q up and play parts of this game that I find fun.

Aside from that, what your post suggests won't work. There are too many variables involved. You expect people to gain a currency to spend to q for a scenario. Which means you'd need 24 people on both sides who've spent the time to gather them. And then to be online at the same time, and then to q at the same time, solely for city, because if not, you'll have less of a chance with people being pulled into other scs. It'd pop just about as much as city does now. With what you've suggested, there would have to be a set time where you would be able to spend those city coins to play the city sieges... which is the problem... the problem that is not being solved by your suggestion. Though I do thank you for it. Hopefully they can delete your comment or move it to the Post you linked to since that has nothing to do with what I brought up.

[Beara]

I guess we’re talking about 24v24 premade scenario, not soloq/pug?
I think it could be interesting, with either city layout or something else, but i disagree with having no, or almost no rewards for it.
Creating a warband is a lot of hassle, especially if you will want to fight some of the better premades. So it should reward you accordingly.
Also, i’m betting 24v24 would be a niche thing like SoloRanked, so there need to be rewards in order to incentivize people to sign up.
Also, if forts gets some kind of rework (thinking mainly P3), they could be converted to instances like city with 24v24-36v36 fights.
Game is balanced round 2-6 and 12-24 man content, so why not build upon the success of city fights and create more opportunities for 24v24 combat.

I"m 100% down for 24v24 scenarios content and I do hope they make that. But this is about play city sieges. Specifically. If they make 24v24 scs that's fine, but that's their prerogative to create a new one. I specifically stated that there should be no Royal crests reward because the devs have stated many times that's not what they want and that content is supposed to be walled off. If they want to create a 24v24 scenario and say use the last stage of city as a template, that'd be cool. but again, don't expect them to give you royal crests/invader crests. They've been walled for a reason. But if you wanted rewards, I would say giving the triumphant or victorious emblems would suffice at best. It's for the fun of a warband vs warband scenario where you can pit your warband against another.

Forts probably cannot be converted into scenarios, as they're a zone themselves and are pretty much scenario based as you'd be ported out of the zone and q'd to get in anyways. Maybe they could lower the amount of people who can get into forts , but that would lower the amount of people able to get invaders so I don't think anyone wants that.

[kmark101]

Proposed a doable solution for this here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=38537&start=90#p416055

You missed the concept. I don't want to have these scenarios have anything to do with rvr or progression. They are scenarios in which you'd play the city sc in a 24v24. I don't care about royals, I don't care about sovereign. Yes they could reward you with normal sc emblems or with ranked emblems. But my idea is to get to play fun city scenarios without having to deal with the Rvr. oRvr is terrible in my opinion unless you have no life to sit and play the game for 10 hours at a time. Unfortunately, i'm an adult, with a full time job. When I play this game, it's for fun.

This is not about progression, this is about playing a fun aspect of the game that's walled off. I'd sacrifice rewards for the chance to play city because I think it's fun. This would also allow guilds to set up and test group comps for when actual city pops happen. It is NOT, I REPEAT, is NOT a way to get royal crests or find a loophole to get city equipment faster. At most it should offer the ranked sc emblems, if that.

Please stop trying to get rewarded for nothing. The devs(or one dev in specific that I've seen) has made it clear that's not going to happen and I agree with it. That being said, I like city and I would like to play it without investing 6+hours of time I don't have. I have a life, so when I have leisure time, i'd like to q up and play parts of this game that I find fun.

Aside from that, what your post suggests won't work. There are too many variables involved. You expect people to gain a currency to spend to q for a scenario. Which means you'd need 24 people on both sides who've spent the time to gather them. And then to be online at the same time, and then to q at the same time, solely for city, because if not, you'll have less of a chance with people being pulled into other scs. It'd pop just about as much as city does now. With what you've suggested, there would have to be a set time where you would be able to spend those city coins to play the city sieges... which is the problem... the problem that is not being solved by your suggestion. Though I do thank you for it. Hopefully they can delete your comment or move it to the Post you linked to since that has nothing to do with what I brought up.

First of all, I did not miss your concept, it's just something that can't be done how you imagined. Simply the game was not built that way, it was built on progression. You won't be able to change that. At the same time, I understand what you want to achieve, to be able to play more city sieges/24v24 cause you think it's fun. I think so too. Problem is how they are unaccessible right now besides a few certain time slots as they won't have unlimited access anyway (with or without reward, it's irrelevant). This is your problem too, otherwise you wouldn't look for a solution to play it more. These are the given boundaries that you need to find a solution in.

What I suggested is basically how every guild plays already anyway: they have given schedule for guild warbands, so what you write about "you'd need 24 people on sides who've spent the time to gather them" is already happening every day, they are already forming up at a given time schedule, for example in our case every wednesday 9pm, alongside with 2 other guilds... how is this a problem suddenly? You wouldn't need all 24 people to queue individually as you don't need it for a city siege queue now either, only the leader queues in, so thats also not a problem that you refer to. In the end, this will have the exact same result that you are looking for: play more city siege instances because it becomes more accessible, but inside the boundaries of progression based content.

The "stop trying to rewarded for nothing" comments I don't understand, noone had any kind of suggestion like that in any post, in fact it's the exact opposite.

If you are just trying to add Altdorf/IC as a regular scenario, that's a different story, but then it wouldn't work (or way too big of a work) because city instances have stages, a reconnect mechanism, contribution based stage progression, etc.. it's drastically different from a normal scenario.

[Beara]

Proposed a doable solution for this here: viewtopic.php?f=15&t=38537&start=90#p416055

You missed the concept. I don't want to have these scenarios have anything to do with rvr or progression. They are scenarios in which you'd play the city sc in a 24v24. I don't care about royals, I don't care about sovereign. Yes they could reward you with normal sc emblems or with ranked emblems. But my idea is to get to play fun city scenarios without having to deal with the Rvr. oRvr is terrible in my opinion unless you have no life to sit and play the game for 10 hours at a time. Unfortunately, i'm an adult, with a full time job. When I play this game, it's for fun.

This is not about progression, this is about playing a fun aspect of the game that's walled off. I'd sacrifice rewards for the chance to play city because I think it's fun. This would also allow guilds to set up and test group comps for when actual city pops happen. It is NOT, I REPEAT, is NOT a way to get royal crests or find a loophole to get city equipment faster. At most it should offer the ranked sc emblems, if that.

Please stop trying to get rewarded for nothing. The devs(or one dev in specific that I've seen) has made it clear that's not going to happen and I agree with it. That being said, I like city and I would like to play it without investing 6+hours of time I don't have. I have a life, so when I have leisure time, i'd like to q up and play parts of this game that I find fun.

Aside from that, what your post suggests won't work. There are too many variables involved. You expect people to gain a currency to spend to q for a scenario. Which means you'd need 24 people on both sides who've spent the time to gather them. And then to be online at the same time, and then to q at the same time, solely for city, because if not, you'll have less of a chance with people being pulled into other scs. It'd pop just about as much as city does now. With what you've suggested, there would have to be a set time where you would be able to spend those city coins to play the city sieges... which is the problem... the problem that is not being solved by your suggestion. Though I do thank you for it. Hopefully they can delete your comment or move it to the Post you linked to since that has nothing to do with what I brought up.

First of all, I did not miss your concept, it's just something that can't be done how you imagined. Simply the game was not built that way, it was built on progression. You won't be able to change that. At the same time, I understand what you want to achieve, to be able to play more city sieges/24v24 cause you think it's fun. I think so too. Problem is how they are unaccessible right now besides a few certain time slots as they won't have unlimited access anyway (with or without reward, it's irrelevant). This is your problem too, otherwise you wouldn't look for a solution to play it more. These are the given boundaries that you need to find a solution in.

What I suggested is basically how every guild plays already anyway: they have given schedule for guild warbands, so what you write about "you'd need 24 people on sides who've spent the time to gather them" is already happening every day, they are already forming up at a given time schedule, for example in our case every wednesday 9pm, alongside with 2 other guilds... how is this a problem suddenly? You wouldn't need all 24 people to queue individually as you don't need it for a city siege queue now either, only the leader queues in, so thats also not a problem that you refer to. In the end, this will have the exact same result that you are looking for: play more city siege instances because it becomes more accessible, but inside the boundaries of progression based content.

The "stop trying to rewarded for nothing" comments I don't understand, noone had any kind of suggestion like that in any post, in fact it's the exact opposite.

If you are just trying to add Altdorf/IC as a regular scenario, that's a different story, but then it wouldn't work (or way too big of a work) because city instances have stages, a reconnect mechanism, contribution based stage progression, etc.. it's drastically different from a normal scenario.

Please stop telling me what I meant to say. I said what I meant to say. You just missed the concept. Don't get angry. It's not personal.
I don't want 24/24. I want city to be q'able. You can't tell me it can't be done as it's being done. Sorry you missed the concept and you're angry.
You literally posted a link to:
"I think the following solution is certainly doable as every elements of it are already in the game:
People would receive a special "city token" upon participating in the campaign for the week. Participation can be measured in several ways, for the simplicity let's say how many times they have been to fort or how many times they have pushed/defended an end zone. Every part of this system is already in game: participation calculation, weekly token distribution (for rankeds). Every "city token" would be valid for a week, again, this is also in game as part of the weekend warfront rewards only valid for 7 days now.
People could use their city tokens for 7 days at anytime, the city queue would be available for them when they have a city token in their inventory. They could queue the exact same way, as either solo or wb/group. This is how people queue for cities now, zero change. When a city is finished, one city token is used and gone. This would also happen if people play the city in a "normal way", so there would be no additional city sieges than intended for a player (ie. you could decide to either go when the actual siege happens or later with your friends, see last line of this post!)
With these you would be able to play the city sieges anytime, but still gated behind the progression content, but without changing any part of the basic design (ie. no royal drops from orvr, etc..) and the progression with royal crests. Since city sieges would be more accessible on a weekly basis for everyone who contributed to the campaign, I'd lower the amount of crests in bags from cities, but that's just fine tuning the system."

Which states and I quote "With these you would be able to play the city sieges anytime, but still gated behind the progression content, but without changing any part of the basic design (ie. no royal drops from orvr, etc..) and the progression with royal crests."
So, there is where you were asking for Royals.

Anything else I need to point out for you? Please create your own thread instead of hijacking other people's if you don't know what they're talking about.
I don't need to hear anymore from you as you don't grasp the concept that i'm talking about, so you wouldn't know what could or couldn't work for it.
We're done here, you can move on. Have a good one!