Changelog 02/11/16

[Azarael]

The speed buff changed to 30% for 2 seconds in a recent patch.

[Akalukz]

Is there a zone cap on # of siege/artillery weapons? I thought it was tied to keep rank?

It is tied to keep rank.

Ok, still not gettng the answer i was looking for, maybe I am not being clear. I don't know the exact numbers so bear with me.

Rank 1 = 1 cannon
Rank 2 = 2 cannons
Rank 3 = 3 cannons
Rank 4 = 4 cannons
Rank 5 = 5 cannons.


Are the additive? At Rank 5 are there really 15 cannons available in zone? or is there still only 5 cannons available? What happens to those cannons when a keep goes from R5 to R1 are there still 15 (5) cannons available in zone or is there now only 1?

I am not sure if I am asking the question correctly or not.

[Azarael]

It's not proportionally tied to keep rank, though the actual numbers are very close to being additive with keep rank. I ballparked the allocation of siege per rank and it's probably too high, as I did not expect to see Rank 5 keeps.

If keep rank falls, the only effect is that the supply cap immediately drops, and any destroyed siege weapons cannot be replaced until the total active number falls below the supply cap. This was not having any effect in the previous build, because cannons were close to indestructible. It should matter more in this build, as one cannon will destroy another in about 4 shots, so flanking an advance with ST cannons to take out their backline of artillery should be a valid tactical move.

[dur3al]

To be a broken record yet again - cannon HP was too high. See how it performs when AoE cannons can be sniped, as intended. But one thing doesn't change - those cannons are designed to make mass infantry attacks along a single front unviable.

If that is the case, they should be able to be used nearby keeps only.

I understand what you're trying to achieve with the cannon things but in my opinion:

a) They should not be involved in roaming fight - hence siege weapons should only be used where a siege is happening - nearby a keep.
b) They do not promote fun play with your own class - so now melee dps in oRvR is such in a bad spot that they might as well be cannon bots? Yeah... I think most people will not do that unless to troll other people (promoting even more griefing and causing people to grow bored at oRvR), and will probably stop oRvR or roll a ranged class.
Being a cannon bot as a mdps on a keep might be ok.
c) If punt-cannons do not give immunity is pretty much impossible for people on inner to stay inside keep - where is safe for them - since they get chain punted out - which is why I suggest for them to give immunity, as a sort of counter play to that. Keep in mind that defenders sniping and targeting enemy cannons as a counter play sounds good, but in reality you've to consider the attacking force will have at least twice amount of players and probably cannons, coupled with magus/engi range boosts they'll probably down the defenders cannons much quicker... and then will be unavailable to purchase new ones when enemies push past outer.

[Azarael]

The cannon changes should be taken only as one half of the whole. They were intended to be a fallback for any failure on my part, mechanics-wise, to split players up through BOs and supply returning. I've adjusted the lock timer mechanics further to this end.

I can't overemphasise that the unintentional indestructibility of cannons changed things quite significantly, and that I expect today's play to differ a fair bit from yesterday's.

[Akalukz]

Sounds good Aza, thanks for the clarifications and I look forward to trying the changes this evening.

[dur3al]

The cannon changes should be taken only as one half of the whole. They were intended to be a fallback for any failure on my part, mechanics-wise, to split players up through BOs and supply returning. I've adjusted the lock timer mechanics further to this end.

Currently I think no matter how much you try, you'll not be able to completely disperse players throughout BOs and, in a manner of speaking, break the zerg.

Because its not about game mechanics. People will follow other people and try to use them as meat-shields/diversion - no matter which open oRvR game or mechanic is in place. Its about effectiveness in being able to succeed in killing someone.. so unless you roll a fully solo build, or very good risk/reward class, such as a range dps (currently), or stealth-er burst class, you will follow a zerg in order to be able to kill something and fulfill your role.

If I had to suggest something to help into breaking this, the only thing that comes to mind is if you needed to capture & hold an amount of BOs simultaneously in order to give big rewards - forcing group of players to split up to achieve an objective.

So in an example lets say you've 4 BOs and you need to capture and hold all of them in a window of 2 minutes (estimate, to give some window for reinforcements to arrive), and you've 4 warbands worth of players in one side, and 2 warbands on the other side.

For the high population side, ideally they'd put 1 warband to capture/hold each one BO.
- The counter-play for the less populated side is that they can send their 2 warbands to one of the BOs - and prevent that being captured/held by effectively outnumbering their opponent.
- The counter-counter-play for the high population side is splitting their numbers even more by having half-warband defending each BO, while the rest will roam between in order to try and assist the BO being attacked as quickly as possible, failure in doing so, will see that BO's defenders wiped and the BO lost/locked, now having to wait a certain time until they can do so again - also giving the less populated side more opportunities to repeat their strategy in another BO all the while benefiting from AAO.
- The counter-counter-counter-play for the low population side is splitting their warbands in 2, attacking 2 BOs at the same time increasing their odds for success, or making half a warband attack somewhere as a diversion (or having their best players in it) while the rest effectively attack the unsuspected BO.
- Etc.

This way I think you'd be satisfying everyone:
- The people who enjoy rolling in organized guild warbands, since they'll more often find fights with equal guilds.
- To the guys who enjoy playing solo and rolling with a pug organized warband still feeling very important in accomplishing the objective while communicating with the other warbands and will most likely meet equal opposition.
- There will be plenty opportunities for ganking in a 6 man or less (& solo) as I explained above the higher population side requires to split up quite a lot in order to succeed. While the gankers and 6 man groups from the zerging side can be on the roaming duty effectively killing off the low population side once they hit an BO.
- A kite group (pretty much 9 out of 10 premades out here) will be useful since they're the perfect decoy in attracting attention while some other group is pushing for a BO, they'll feel like they're not only farming kills but participating into the oRvR to their faction, if the opposition defending the BO gets to thin by sending people to another BO, they could actually wipe them and take the BO themselves being even more effective to their realm and reaping the rewards from the BO itself.

If anything i'd leave Keeps out of the equation as a sort of super difficult objective, which is the spawn for everyone in the zone (and can probably have a sort-of portal where all the players from the low population side can go to to defend) which is not involved in the zone locking/rewarding system but if the high populated side still wants to give it a go for some other reason (rewarding very high amount of rp/inf/medallions/titles/cosmetics) they're free to do it at their own peril facing risky cannon/pve odds.
This to me also adds a different flavor to oRvR, imagine back in the day in World of Warcraft that you had your huge cities but you couldn't attack it (off PvP), but in this case you have this super difficult place that if you are strong enough (zergy enough) you can actually take it, but not being part of the general zone locking system reward etc.
So now you can actually boost the defenders ability to defend by a lot, giving the underdog side the help they require when facing higher odds, without being afraid to lock the oRvR into that single spot while also not punishing and keeping the higher population side from their rewards.

So now you've tackled a couple oRvR issues:
- Range being a monster in keep fights.
- Funneling doors.
- Zerg.
- Making BOs meaningful and effectively force oRvR to be about the zone, not about the keep.
- During low population times, people will still be able to lock zones (even if there is no fighting to be had) - these people shouldn't be punished and should still find a way to progress, even if less due low contribution from kills for e.g..
- Promote communication (promote friendship and encourage people to talk with each other), as I showed in the example above, communication will be key in taking a zone, people will even go in as scouts to see enemy movement (promoting splitting).
- Promote realm pride.
- People will make use of the entirety of the terrain to their advantage, groups will even more often use PvE routes to reach BOs unsuspected.
- Fighting all around, as WAR should be, all the while having niche play-styles such as certain groups preferring to fight/defend certain BOs that its terrain friendly with their play style.
- In my opinion, you'll also address cross-realm in a sense, let me explain:
Its about trying to create a 50/50% fight scenario, even if the populations are 150/50, while having good rewards in taking/defending BOs instead of only in the final zone capture.
While the less populated side in this system will hardly ever be able to lock a zone, they'll still get their reward from attacking BOs, and if they frustrate the high population long enough, what will happen (what always happens in RoR) is that people will start changing sides, but as in the example, high population don't bring that huge advantage, and when population shifts, the impact won't be so big as it is now.
- No snowballing with higher numbers into the objectives.

Of course this is an example and I haven't thought about many side effects that i'd be happy to think over if people indulged me, but yeah.. that's how I would like to see oRvR.

I can't overemphasise that the unintentional indestructibility of cannons changed things quite significantly, and that I expect today's play to differ a fair bit from yesterday's.

Fair enough, we'll see how things do play out this time.

[Tiggo]

Because its not about game mechanics. People will follow other people and try to use them as meat-shields/diversion - no matter which open oRvR game or mechanic is in place. Its about effectiveness in being able to succeed in killing someone

i think thats a cultural thing, you need to educate people and here warbandleaders come into play and the bigger rvr guilds. those will be the warbands protecting the bos and less zerging. (thus thats why its so important to get them rewarded too).

[dur3al]

Because its not about game mechanics. People will follow other people and try to use them as meat-shields/diversion - no matter which open oRvR game or mechanic is in place. Its about effectiveness in being able to succeed in killing someone

i think thats a cultural thing, you need to educate people and here warbandleaders come into play and the bigger rvr guilds. those will be the warbands protecting the bos and less zerging. (thus thats why its so important to get them rewarded too).

Unfortunately there is no point to communicate in a zone, it pains me to see so many groups out there each just doing their own thing.
Currently, the whole zone is a funnel, it starts and all ends at the keep, hence many people just afk/wait or do nothing until the keep fight starts. By changing the focus from the keep to the actual zone it changes a lot of things, most of them in a good way if you ask me.

[Akalukz]

I see where dureal is going. Control the zone to attack the keep.

Think of Praag. Southern Keep and a Northern keep. In order for either side to seige they need to maintain control of the in between (4 bos) This is what the last ORvR was had to have 3 bo's to seige. It didin't work either. It is ideal, but not realistic. Maybe it should merge with the current ORvR.

BO control. the keep ranking systems and one active zone. Force the fight. I can see it in my minds eye! Underdog realms defending specific BO's to halt an advance. Cannons to break them, cannons to help defend them. If only it would work that way.