If the guild is not forming I don't bother with cities.
They are not fun. In many aspects it's a zero sum game; a level of competitiveness that while some may enjoy, I frankly don't have the time or patience for; especially since it's not even a competitive feature. There are no windows telling you what a guild or player's W/L ratio is for cities, no special rewards or MMR for big city epeen bois (or girls).
Best case scenario: you stomp the enemy team; bad time for them, good time for you. Best outcome since it means a fast city.
Worst case scenario: enemy stomps you; vice-versa. Best outcome for enemy since it means a fast city.
"Optimal" case scenario: teams are equally balanced, a single fight takes 20+ minutes and nobody wipes. City ends up taking over an hour of constant, intense, fighting. After all that, if you win, you get the same reward as if you stomped a bad team. If you lose, same reward as if you were stomped. I've had cities end where i felt phyiscally and mentally exhausted, even had headaches.
This in part has to do with another underlying issue in RoR when balanced teams meet each other: Time To Kill. But that's neither here nor there. Let's not even bring up the class Desire-o-Meter.
I kind of wish cities were reworked to allow for more than just blobs fighting blobs. In fact, sometimes it's more fun to be in a pug cities when the fighting spreads out, making the combat more personal and manageable (meaning more downtime so your brain doesn't melt). I don't have any proper suggestion though (idk, i'm not a game designer) and I know there are people who don't want this, please don't reply to me telling me that i am wrong and that current city is good; i don't care.
Some good ideas I've read in this thread which I would like to highlight (i'd upvote the post, but Max Hayman (
who owes me a Lamborghini) thinks a new website is not a priority (maybe it's not; idk, i'm not a Max Hayman).
Stophy22 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 03, 2021 12:37 pm
Having issues with city where someone leaves? Here is an idea:
Don't limit the que time to 30minutes and then close it, instead have a 30minute build time and then after 30minutes and warbands are formed fire off the instances all at the same time, (fixes the dodging issue) 24 matches 24, 12 matches 12, 6 matches 6. Keep the que open until the last instance is completed but no new instances can be created after the build time. Limit que to solo only after the 30minute kick off to all instances then solo players now get the luxury of filling disconnected members in instances while city instances are active. They can go que and if an instance is happening and someone leaves/DC's then poof in comes a new player to fill your ranks. Obviously there should be some prio to what roles fill what spots and not all based on the, "whose-first-in-line" system.
What this doesn't cater toward solo players?
Good, devs have stated multiple times that this game isn't really for solo players. Don't waste time and resources designing a system for them especially when time and resources aren't available.
Bonus questions:
Well what if there isn't a 24 warband to match on the other side?
Want cities to still incentivize larger numbers queing up for them?
What is causing people to do 12/6man instances then?
Afraid of the effects of making gear progression faster to incentivize systems?
sharpblader wrote: ↑Tue Aug 03, 2021 11:04 am
Personally, I would prefer to see a system which balances out the matchmaking. 24 vs 24, 12 + pug vs 12 + pug, pug vs pug etc. We can lower the amount of rewards for cities without full 24 people on each side to penalize puggers and incentivize organized players. For even if the rewards are low it will be more fun to play against a balanced matchup.
Sorry for the long wall of text but I strongly believe that making RoR a little more pug friendly will promote Its growth in the long term.