The State of RvR [Feedback]

[wonshot]

Half of these issues are a month old, and have either been attempted adressed or changed completly. hardly any reason to bump the post?

[Dalsie]

Half of these issues are a month old, and have either been attempted adressed or changed completly. hardly any reason to bump the post?

You are wrong. And if you have nothing constructive to contribute, then please don't contribute anything at all. If you intend to start a flaming me about how not-wrong you are, then please do so via pm. I would be happy to engage with you there.

[wonshot]

Half of these issues are a month old, and have either been attempted adressed or changed completly. hardly any reason to bump the post?

You are wrong. And if you have nothing constructive to contribute, then please don't contribute anything at all. If you intend to start a flaming me about how not-wrong you are, then please do so via pm. I would be happy to engage with you there.

lol what? why the instant defensive stance?

I think you were making some brilliant points when this topic was made but look at the list and where we are now, it just seem very outdated already (mainly because several of these issues have been solved)
Portal clicking is not an issue any more, lowbies have something to do with better sub 40brackets, better lootbag progression, acces to forts, more active sub 40scs.
Bottomfloor funnels in forts now have a leaver as of last patch,
AoE cap has its own feedback topic
The lord mechanics have been mentioned to be getting yet an other potential overhaul in the future, from a very lose quote so that is being adressed aswel.

So what is exactly is left on the list you made. All of this was done just within one month, thats pretty nicely done by the devs as the have covered or will cover most of the points you listed, while they are rumored to funnel their remaining time into city sieges to give us the final touch on the campaign system to make oRvR have a purpose that is not just goldbag focused for personal gains.

As for oRvR. I am enjoying more than ever!

[Dalsie]

Half of these issues are a month old, and have either been attempted adressed or changed completly. hardly any reason to bump the post?

You are wrong. And if you have nothing constructive to contribute, then please don't contribute anything at all. If you intend to start a flaming me about how not-wrong you are, then please do so via pm. I would be happy to engage with you there.

lol what? why the instant defensive stance?

I think you were making some brilliant points when this topic was made but look at the list and where we are now, it just seem very outdated already (mainly because several of these issues have been solved)
Portal clicking is not an issue any more, lowbies have something to do with better sub 40brackets, better lootbag progression, acces to forts, more active sub 40scs.
Bottomfloor funnels in forts now have a leaver as of last patch,
AoE cap has its own feedback topic
The lord mechanics have been mentioned to be getting yet an other potential overhaul in the future, from a very lose quote so that is being adressed aswel.

So what is exactly is left on the list you made. All of this was done just within one month, thats pretty nicely done by the devs as the have covered or will cover most of the points you listed, while they are rumored to funnel their remaining time into city sieges to give us the final touch on the campaign system to make oRvR have a purpose that is not just goldbag focused for personal gains.

As for oRvR. I am enjoying more than ever!

The instant defensive stance comes from this - I may have a low post count, but I read the forums actively and almost every time I see your participation in a thread, it's at a point where the thread has devolved to either flaming or e-peen measuring or both. I have no interest in either of those. If that is a misperception on my part, then I apologise.

You are correct, most of those 'issues' have been addressed. But this feedback thread was made after those 'solutions' were implemented. They are mentioned as issues because those were the problems which motivated the the current changes. If you feel that forts, RvR and the state in general is best it's ever been, then fair enough - that is valuable feedback enough. There are people who disagree, and I am one of them. Forts used to be, and should be, the culmination of zone fights - not just another zone fight. They used to require surgical coordination, especially when lords had their KD mechanics. Today they are only a zerg, one way or the other. "Portal Clicking" was one of the complaints that people made which led to fort changes, yet Yaliskah says this:
(viewtopic.php?f=8&t=34244 - so that you don't think i'm taking anything out of context)

Now players are waiting for forts, doing SC.
Weeks ago players were complaining because :
a. No Sc were popping > Problem solved
b. 70% of players were **** during Fort doing :
-b1 : Clicking like crazy cow on portal (and not doing RvR) and complaining about bad design. > Problem solved
-b2 : Waiting desesperately for SC and complaining about matchmaking. > Problem Solved

If players don't go in RvR (who haven't changed), i guess reason is not a direct consequence of Fort access, but more a consequence of path of least resistance to have stuff doing 0 efforts.
Some don't wanna play, we all have to deal with it. Some just want a shiny character. I blame a player choice.

He is really just pointing out 2 problems here, SC Pops and Portal Clicking:
1- SC Pops - Removing matchmaking from <40 SC is a change that could have been made independently from massive RvR overhauls. 40 Pops are same as usual, and if more players than before are simply Q'ing 2 SC because they don't want to be in RvR, it means more players now prefer being in SC than in RvR, which is a pretty clear indicator that RvR is worse now than before.
2- Clicking Portals - just read the statement on the path of least resistance and player choice. The 'player choice' argument is one that goes both ways. The vast majority of people who used to sit at portals clicking were the ones trying to get a sneaky spot without much contribution in the previous zone. They chose to do that. They wanted least resistance. Same argument, opposite direction.


Forts and RvR in general are in the worst state they have ever been, in my opinion, and every one of the issues in OP are still relevant.

[Ravai]

The no cap is fine, issue is getting no rewards as a defender even if you sat there with 120% aao trying desperately to defend the fort, there is 0 incentive right now to defend the fort due to these issues.

- Almost guaranteed to lose and get no bag roll
- Get farmed as the numbers are too great to pose much, if any threat due to being run over by multiple warbands
- no medals even if you are there from the start
- Toxic chat as people get frustrated by this leading to a bad experience for these players of the current "endgame"

Solutions

- 4 medals guaranteed for defenders if the aao is over 60%?
- There needs to be some buff or system in place for defenders if the aao exceeds 100% as its impossible to defend currently against these odds
- Let invader medals drop on player kills so regardless of what side your on you can form groups to get medals and it pushes pvp combat as opposed to objective based combat which promotes pvp avoidance (you should always be pushing pvp combat btw nobody plays this game for pve)

[Direbloodykiller]

The no cap is fine, issue is getting no rewards as a defender even if you sat there with 120% aao trying desperately to defend the fort, there is 0 incentive right now to defend the fort due to these issues.

- Almost guaranteed to lose and get no bag roll
- Get farmed as the numbers are too great to pose much, if any threat due to being run over by multiple warbands
- no medals even if you are there from the start
- Toxic chat as people get frustrated by this leading to a bad experience for these players of the current "endgame"

Solutions

- 4 medals guaranteed for defenders if the aao is over 60%?
- There needs to be some buff or system in place for defenders if the aao exceeds 100% as its impossible to defend currently against these odds
- Let invader medals drop on player kills so regardless of what side your on you can form groups to get medals and it pushes pvp combat as opposed to objective based combat which promotes pvp avoidance (you should always be pushing pvp combat btw nobody plays this game for pve)

I would state that everything except the buff system is a great idea. Imho, there should never be anything that strenghten anyone due to AAO, the only thing that should happend is higher value of a kill.

[Jastojan]

Half of these issues are a month old, and have either been attempted adressed or changed completly. hardly any reason to bump the post?

You are wrong. And if you have nothing constructive to contribute, then please don't contribute anything at all. If you intend to start a flaming me about how not-wrong you are, then please do so via pm. I would be happy to engage with you there.

lol what? why the instant defensive stance?

I think you were making some brilliant points when this topic was made but look at the list and where we are now, it just seem very outdated already (mainly because several of these issues have been solved)
Portal clicking is not an issue any more, lowbies have something to do with better sub 40brackets, better lootbag progression, acces to forts, more active sub 40scs.
Bottomfloor funnels in forts now have a leaver as of last patch,
AoE cap has its own feedback topic
The lord mechanics have been mentioned to be getting yet an other potential overhaul in the future, from a very lose quote so that is being adressed aswel.

So what is exactly is left on the list you made. All of this was done just within one month, thats pretty nicely done by the devs as the have covered or will cover most of the points you listed, while they are rumored to funnel their remaining time into city sieges to give us the final touch on the campaign system to make oRvR have a purpose that is not just goldbag focused for personal gains.

As for oRvR. I am enjoying more than ever!

When time shows that changes dont work well it is always good to get a feedback (my opinion). And - only the time can show what is good or what is wrong. I understand why he was in defensive stance... is there a deadline to write opinion or suggestion about things/changes which you dont like in the game or which could work better (maybe)?

Back to topic.
Man, it realy had to took your time to write it. I appreciate it.
I am not a fan of latest changes about forts and about aoe cap to be honest. Aoe cap brake the balance of classes even more. 24 aoe cap for RvR is too much (10-12 will be much better, 24 is gamebraking). New fort system made this game more about calculation instead of fighting and taking zones. Example: It was Friday or Saturday? Destro could siege Reikland (then could go Reikwald to attack) or def /not to def Caledor (and then go Fell landing - def). Players saw the numbers of course... and here it begins. Many of destro players wanted to let order take the Caledor because there was much higher chance to be successful as a defenders in Fell landing (instead of trying to take Reikland and then trying to win the Reiklawald). So here started the calculations and other problems. Order looked like they wanted to go def Reiklwald because they knew that destro had higher chance to def the Fell landing successfuly. So noone wanted to push and there was a "black hole" in the time and here was the "nothing to do" because both sides were waitnig for the enemy. Some players were in Reikland and tried to siege and some players were in Caledor trying to decide to def or not not def... but nothing serious, nthing organized. I decide to quit the game.
This is the result of both changes - free forts for all and 24 aoe cap. BUT! I like the idea of letting all players to participate on fights in forts but... they should realy participate on closing zones before fort and the the second thing is, the posibility to attack fort should be like a your reward (like a privilage) so your motivation to win the fort (and zones before) should be much much higher than give it up and decide to def another fort. Maybe system of rewards should change, idk. Now many players think like - yes I can have my four invader medals if we succeed and def our fort.

The argument of "nothing to do" during the old system of forts with portals is on the place but very often it was not so tragic. The "nothing to do" stage of game lasted for 1 hour but now the "nothing to do" stage moved to the whole open rvr zones before fort which can last for many hours, because more players are just waiting for their fort or calculate... and they dont participate... this is sad to see.

The idea of Pillaged state looks nice Something like a "fresh air". I have no idea if it is technically possible to make such big change but it sounds good to me.

I think I should make a longer brake because I have less and less pleasure from playing this game. I know devs try to make their best and make this game inviting for everyone. And this is why we all should say big thank to them, realy! But sometimes the way they choose to implement some BIG changes (and the comunications about it before implementing them) is braking the good feeling from this project to me (like this "amazing" 24 aoe cap, or big nerfs of classes like mSH was).

[Alfa1986]

in reality, almost none of these problems is no longer relevant, I see two real problems at the moment (according to messages on the forum and replicas in the chat game):
1. outdated / broken reward system (for some reason, some players do not receive their medals or do not participate in the bag's rolling).
2. sometimes situations are created by players when the power of one side is several times greater than of the other (60 * 150; 100 * 200, 150 * 300, etc.).

I add else that people complain in a general chat about poison forts in chaos direction. and some discourage people from fighting in these directions since these forts are much more difficult to capture than in orcs and elves.

[Suncrusher]

lol what? why the instant defensive stance?

Can you blame him? Im also new here and just from my limited browsing ive noticed that every thread you are in turns into a flame-war and you not even reading the topic, just posting to flame. I feel like every time an issue regarding state of the game comes up you show up just to brown nose the devs.

Id say his defensive stance is warranted.

[wonshot]

When time shows that changes dont work well it is always good to get a feedback (my opinion). And - only the time can show what is good or what is wrong. I understand why he was in defensive stance... is there a deadline to write opinion or suggestion about things/changes which you dont like in the game or which could work better (maybe)?

Ofc there is not a timer or limmitation on when a post is outdated, that is based on its content.

Here let me try to elaborate it a little if that helps clear some misunderstanding, the timing the post was created was super relevant and as the later patches has show it was bang on the money for the issues it adresses. And then the topic kinda became silent as the problems were getting solved or attempted, or atleast adressed by dev comments either on here, the ror discord or by devs on twitch.

So when the forum post one month later is revived by a post like "bump" and 90% of the issues in the main post (yes I read it back then, and I read it when it was bumped) are no longer up-to date, then yes I think a comment such as mine was rightfully placed.

Should the post however be updated with an actual update like" okay one month later and we see alot of improvements but I still think we need to adress X and Y, and here is my reasoning then sure we can continue debating it. But why are we talking about oRvR issues with fort portal clicking, when such a thing is not even in the game anymore. Get my point?

I by no means had anything against the initial post, it was very spot on, for when it was created.