Keep Lord

[Natherul]

About the issue with rank 0 keep and still heavily defended due to players simply sitting there:

We are aware of this issue and will work towards fixing it, no details can be given on exactly how atm or when, but we are going to address it.

[Buran]

staying in the same zone for ages.

the other party to solve this problem is very often Locks and sieges the capitals, like the last dayes of official WHO. I do not know what is more boring! Every routing is bad.

2) Have the attack grow in power as time goes on
This to me is the right option. Of course it should be tied into the resource system. All this simply means is that if your keep is rank 0, the attacker's keep is rank 5 and they hold all BO's, you will hit a diminishing return if you defend with large numbers as time grows. The counterplay to this is that you can have a chunk of those people leave the keep, capture a BO and return a resource. The point here is that idling in the keep for defence is no longer viable for long durations and you will get a penalty, but you can remove/prevent this penalty by actually participating in the RVR lake, as people damn well should.

Do u really think so??? I am suprised Just imajin that yesterday (120 vs 120) order would leave from keep to take BO with ALL (5WBs). What should to do in this situation destruction? Yes, would come to keep and would kill the lord without defend. Yesterday 1-2WSs could not take over an hour. We join to them (99 vs 114) later and only after that 1st ressourse was brought at the keep. at 00.05 pm GMT+3

3) Have other means of capturing the zone.
We were theorycrafting about this yesterday on the guild Teamspeak. One of the suggestions that popped up is why not be able to flip the zone by holding all BOs for an hour or so, without taking the keep (credit to roadkillrobin for the idea). To me this feels more like a bandaid, instead of a true fix to keep sieges. Maybe this could be implemented alongside?

We had at the official WHO system like this - 65points for lock (4BOs, 2keeps, kills at zones, PVE, SC t3 and t4). It was changed.

[lastalien]

I think Devs need to make changes in small portions.
1. buffs or debuffs (stats, HP) on players in connection with the population of the zone or siege time, I think the most stupid thing.
2. Some time ago discussed the idea with the castle without the Lord, and just a few flags. I think it's potentially a good idea.
3. A limit on the number of targets in AoE prevents oppose a large number of enemies at the same time. For example to grab a point wb against a large number of opponents is not obtained because now cover 9 targets is not enough to counter the aggressive Zerg. That is, at a meeting of 24 people with 48, WB just no chance, as the attack goes on strongly smeared the number of players, and randomly, and there is no possibility that that counter.

First of all, we need remove aoe cap.
This will revive the fighting in the field, as well-formed groups can make the right tactical moves without fear of being rolled out by Zerg

[Buran]

3. A limit on the number of targets in AoE prevents oppose a large number of enemies at the same time. For example to grab a point wb against a large number of opponents is not obtained because now cover 9 targets is not enough to counter the aggressive Zerg. That is, at a meeting of 24 people with 48, WB just no chance, as the attack goes on strongly smeared the number of players, and randomly, and there is no possibility that that counter.

Bad idea, couse this adds too many factors that no longer depend on you. And it can be to change situation when AOE WBs will solve the open WBs. This will be hit for community.

[sotora]

About the issue with rank 0 keep and still heavily defended due to players simply sitting there:

We are aware of this issue and will work towards fixing it, no details can be given on exactly how atm or when, but we are going to address it.

Thank you. That is good to hear.

I don't know about others, but for me situation in which you put several hours into capturing a zone, have 5 star rank, been winning open battles against equally sized opponent, situation in which you are organized well and WB leaders talk to each other and you cannot lock the zone (unless you wait it out till 1-2 am in night for enough ppl to log out) cause bunkering yourself in lord room is so effective is VERY demotivating to play.

[Pumatouch]

Dec. 25th.; Praag locked by Order after 4½ hours intense fighting and organization level, equal numbers, no aao present. Nice work.
Dec. 26th.; BC locked by Order after +13 hours of tugging, late at night with little opposition left. Destro came out for supplies during the day only when Lunch shifts made it possible. This might have been due to lazyness on Destro's behalf, or perhaps we wanted them to stay in there with doors open, come next big RvR-shift to the field. Destro holed up and eventually won over our disorganization earlier in the afternoon, and you know what, that's fair game: Any enemy would sieze an obvious advantage - how could this ever be an issue.
End result was +13 hours of glorious battle ingame, nothing more, nothing less.

And I suppose these 2 dates are mere freaks of topography due to Christmas and what not? Not a case of Homo Sapiens inhabiting both sides behind the screen? Generally speaking, perhaps we could empathize with our enemy a little more before we go forum; Would you willingly throw away the winning advantage, for the sake of aesthetics, if it meant you lost the game? Nobody would.
I reject any other issues in here than Crash and Xrealm. Those are on point. The rest is duality-minded garbage-thinking and self-victimization. It suits no one.
I have no problem with Turtling Destro, which is a thing also on any given day. I have a problem with opponents elevating these observations of battleflow to issue-status.
Sincerely. Namaste

[Ghostweed]

3. A limit on the number of targets in AoE prevents oppose a large number of enemies at the same time. For example to grab a point wb against a large number of opponents is not obtained because now cover 9 targets is not enough to counter the aggressive Zerg. That is, at a meeting of 24 people with 48, WB just no chance, as the attack goes on strongly smeared the number of players, and randomly, and there is no possibility that that counter.

First of all, we need remove aoe cap.
This will revive the fighting in the field, as well-formed groups can make the right tactical moves without fear of being rolled out by Zerg

Oh my god, here we go again. Bombhammer revival. How about no?!

[Tifereth]

I have no problem with turtling Destro, which is a thing also on any given day. I have a problem with opponents elevating these observations of battleflow to issue-status.

Arthur dropping merciless truth bombs right here. Lots of feedback regarding subjective "problems" pop up after a night of bitter
fighting, mostly from the losing side. Such feedback is rarely rational, suddenly the lord needs a nerf out of all the things, when keep
takes happen frequently despite heavy resistance.

Not trying to offend anyone, but people are probably aware that the current RvR system still has a fare share of problems, most
of which are not necessarily linked to keeps being generally impenetrable, but rather how the realm losing the lake fight gets
pushed into the keep and has to blob, since once the siege begins, leaving a keep undefended is the surest way to lose the zone. Stealth ration runs in Praag are possible thanks to the glorious layout, but many other supply routes such as those in DW or CW, Caledor etc can easily be cut off by the attacking forces once the enemy is boxed in. Trickle in steady supply while you're on your last leg holding the attackers off is not doable, leaving the defence to pugs isn't either, so if the attackers are relentless trying over and over it can get very grindy real quick for countless hours.

Keeps and Lord room are supposed to be the final "boss", the last stand for the defending realm. It shouldn't get easier for anybody
just because the lake fight has been won. Handing me an auto win because I sieged a keep for 10 hours would seem cheap, I wouldn't want that. The fairy tale of only one faction always having aao and the other always attacking is a myth that should be done with.

[megadeath]

Dec. 26th.; +13 hours of glorious battle ingame, nothing more, nothing less.

Nothing glorious. Order had 4 warbands that refused to come near rank 0 the keep for at least an hour. And when they finally showed up, they forgot to take a ram with them, twice.

[GodlessCrom]

Dec. 26th.; +13 hours of glorious battle ingame, nothing more, nothing less.

Nothing glorious. Order had 4 warbands that refused to come near rank 0 the keep for at least an hour. And when they finally showed up, they forgot to take a ram with them, twice.

Spoiler:

Hm? What's that? Can't hear you through all that salt

Lets not devolve into a flame - Natherul