Ditching Forts Mid-Siege

[dirnsterer]

This is, I think, one of the more interesting points. Defending a fortress siege should be a complete positive for defenders. However, at a certain point there is a strong incentive in the opposite direction. So, even if your defense is qualitatively the best experience it can be - full of harrowing push defenses, last minute saves, and evenly-matched competition - there's still the sting at the end when you realize that you've just prevented yourself from getting into city. Then city comes at some awful time when everyone is asleep, so all of your effort remains unrewarded. It can be frustrating.

Successfully defending a fortress should be a wholly positive feeling.

I honestly think it should be as miserable as it is for the attackers. But at least you can just sit in the safe little funnel as a defender and have the easier go at fort fight.

[Goermsi]

Forts are just as ugly as the cities themselves.
Luckily there are bags in the lakes now and we can all be happy that we could avoid the unpopular content if we just wanted to

[duvalx]

Destro have had it far to easy for far to long... any kind of effort seems to hard by the majority of the mindless Zergling player .. not all i might add some awesome destro players...
Order suffered for ages in cities and still do to a point, but i must say its got better,
you will always get people shout fix this, fix that , and yes in a game like this everyone has an opinion bias on side and class ect.
The devs work so hard to give us a platform to enjoy and have fun, its not always about shouting nerf! always wanting to have a easy win .. enjoy the game that is given to us for free ....
sometimes the game does not feel fair! .. 1v1 or zerg... sometimes its just not fair.. but neither is life.. just enjoy the game for what it is..

[Noslock]

Its called leech more renown.When capping/defending a couple of flags / throwing an aoe fire pots gives you enough contribution to get the same renown as partecipating in the full fort the choice is easy.Get enough contri in one fort and jump to another fort and if a third opens up jump to that too.And no I'm not telling people to throw fort.

[Gurf]

The incentive was a 5* City , which ended up being pushed early morning instead

This is, I think, one of the more interesting points. Defending a fortress siege should be a complete positive for defenders. However, at a certain point there is a strong incentive in the opposite direction. So, even if your defense is qualitatively the best experience it can be - full of harrowing push defenses, last minute saves, and evenly-matched competition - there's still the sting at the end when you realize that you've just prevented yourself from getting into city. Then city comes at some awful time when everyone is asleep, so all of your effort remains unrewarded. It can be frustrating.

Successfully defending a fortress should be a wholly positive feeling.

Personally I enjoy stop Des getting to City, even if it stops a 5* City which I can win bags in, especially if Des are working really hard to try to get there. Probably not everyone plays like that and it nay be different on Des side and people throw but I know plenty of people who play in the same way including Warband leaders. I would rather push a 2* IC than allow a 5* Altdorf

[emiliorv]

Spoiler:

while the original defenders are still occupied at the 1st fort.

Why you stay defending a empty fort?? Just leave and go to def the second one.

Order doesn't even have to abandon any rewards because they know that it will take longer to open the 2nd fort than it will for the clock to expire on the now empty fort. So if by the time dest gets to the 2nd fort, those same Order are there, why would destro fair any better the 2nd time/why not just try to actually win the 1st fort?

Then what is the problem? you can defend both forts, what is your issue with this?

[CountTalabecland]

The incentive was a 5* City , which ended up being pushed early morning instead

Whenever I am defending the last fort before at 5 star city, yeah I go around trying to get kills and win, but I am secretly hoping attacker wins so we can go city for sovs. No I won't throw, but at the same time you are defending knowing that you would get more rewards if you just afked in city and did not use your reservation. That system ain't right.

[CountTalabecland]

Spoiler:

Why you stay defending a empty fort?? Just leave and go to def the second one.

Order doesn't even have to abandon any rewards because they know that it will take longer to open the 2nd fort than it will for the clock to expire on the now empty fort. So if by the time dest gets to the 2nd fort, those same Order are there, why would destro fair any better the 2nd time/why not just try to actually win the 1st fort?

Then what is the problem? you can defend both forts, what is your issue with this?

Because destro never even makes it to the 2nd fort, or even if they do, they lose and log off. My issue is that it blows up the campaign, everyone logs off, and then zones have 20 ppl each in them and its no fun.

I don't care about fort rewards or even min/maxing forts or whatever. This "strategy" of leaving forts early is causing the entire campaign to implode.

[Pitivier]

2) Organized guilds hate forts, at least on Destro side. It is not uncommon for them to make decision even before fort starts that they will not go in, if there are any open zones to continue fighting. Reason is that they want somewhat interesting and fair fights, that forts cannot provide. Further issue here is that, in most cases, those WBs will have most contribution, so that is straight away 24ppl less in fort that will be filled with pugs, reducing any chance of victory for attackers. Possible solution would be to ask people would they like to participate in fort, based on contribution, instead of giving it straight away. This way those players can press no, and reservations would be passed to next 24 ppl with highest contribution. Not ideal, but I think its slightly better and I don't see solution where you would force those guilds to participate (neither you should). Is this possible?

I don't know about hating forts because I like them, however I do think it would be a good thing to be able to give up one's reservation.
There have been a lot of times when I participate in a zone, get a fort reservation but even if I know I wont go for whatever reason, I can't let my res go to someone who will use it.

[emiliorv]

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Order doesn't even have to abandon any rewards because they know that it will take longer to open the 2nd fort than it will for the clock to expire on the now empty fort. So if by the time dest gets to the 2nd fort, those same Order are there, why would destro fair any better the 2nd time/why not just try to actually win the 1st fort?

Then what is the problem? you can defend both forts, what is your issue with this?

Because destro never even makes it to the 2nd fort, or even if they do, they lose and log off. My issue is that it blows up the campaign, everyone logs off, and then zones have 20 ppl each in them and its no fun.

Dont defend and let attackers win. problem solved.

You cant win fort and stop campaign and at same time pretend that campaign keep going...