Better population balance.

[lyncher12]

yes always good to just pick half a sentence.....
read my full post again maybe you get behind what i mean

You die as AM because you are out of position and getting zero support in a pug warband, not because you picked AM. Shaman has a lot nice tactics but you can't slot them all, usually you drop one of those you mentioned, if not both.

Always that stupids mantras....shamans played poorly in random pugs are free rps too...you can waste 2 tactic slots and increase your survability?? yes, youwill last 1 more hit...maybe 2, but you wont survive a assist train => free rps....once the ST MA noticed you are free rps he will kill you FOREVER.

aoe detaunt, puddle, not going full willpower, having a group that isn't brain afk mashing nerfed buttons. 2 dps should have a hard time killing a healer in a warband if there is proper gameplay.

[Aethilmar]

So here is a hot take on population balance - the game reward system (as it stands) isn't built to have a balanced population as rewards come primarily from bag rolls, forts and cities.

Balanced population leads to stagnation in the lakes which leads to fewer rewards. You actually want something like a 55-45 (or greater) population split at most times to keep the campaigns moving forward.

[emiliorv]

So here is a hot take on population balance - the game reward system (as it stands) isn't built to have a balanced population as rewards come primarily from bag rolls, forts and cities.

Balanced population leads to stagnation in the lakes which leads to fewer rewards. You actually want something like a 55-45 (or greater) population split at most times to keep the campaigns moving forward.

Totally this....i proposed this question for Q&A but seems that wasnt interesting enough to bring any answer:

ENDGAME RVR AND POPULATION BALANCE:
With the actual design of Campaign its imposible to achive both RVR-Endgame and population balance. if you reach a perfect balance of population (50%/50%) the campaign enter in stalemate and stop progressing, if the server had a perfect balance for 24h/day cities will never happen.

(IMO) The current design encourage:
-Throw: players want to play endgame, dont bother to lose to reach a bigger reward.
-Xrealm: to overpopulated faction to make campaign advace faster.
-Population imbalance: right now, more imbalance = more endgame.

QUESTION: is there any plans to remake how RVR-Endgame happens to avoid this issues?


viewtopic.php?f=8&t=43588


Until this sistem changes WE NEED MORE XREALMERS TO OVERPOP SIDE AND MORE UNBALANCE...

[zulnam]

So here is a hot take on population balance - the game reward system (as it stands) isn't built to have a balanced population as rewards come primarily from bag rolls, forts and cities.

Balanced population leads to stagnation in the lakes which leads to fewer rewards. You actually want something like a 55-45 (or greater) population split at most times to keep the campaigns moving forward.

Totally this....i proposed this question for Q&A but seems that wasnt interesting enough to bring any answer:

ENDGAME RVR AND POPULATION BALANCE:
With the actual design of Campaign its imposible to achive both RVR-Endgame and population balance. if you reach a perfect balance of population (50%/50%) the campaign enter in stalemate and stop progressing, if the server had a perfect balance for 24h/day cities will never happen.

(IMO) The current design encourage:
-Throw: players want to play endgame, dont bother to lose to reach a bigger reward.
-Xrealm: to overpopulated faction to make campaign advace faster.
-Population imbalance: right now, more imbalance = more endgame.

QUESTION: is there any plans to remake how RVR-Endgame happens to avoid this issues?


viewtopic.php?f=8&t=43588


Until this sistem changes WE NEED MORE XREALMERS TO OVERPOP SIDE AND MORE UNBALANCE...

But this feels like a core game design flaw; one that could possibly originate from the lack of a 3rd faction, as seen in DaoC. I mean, what do you expect a team of volunteers with no budget and little control over the codebase to do? Change RvR? How????

Until (if ever) this becomes a valid product with a budget and a paying playerbase, things will probably stay the same; at least for a very long time. What you are describing is a major overhaul of the game design.
The kind of work people get paid to do.

Games Workshop; come ooooooonnn alreaddddyyy. If i promise to but Age of Sigmar, can you please take my money for RoR too?

[emiliorv]

Spoiler:

So here is a hot take on population balance - the game reward system (as it stands) isn't built to have a balanced population as rewards come primarily from bag rolls, forts and cities.

Balanced population leads to stagnation in the lakes which leads to fewer rewards. You actually want something like a 55-45 (or greater) population split at most times to keep the campaigns moving forward.

Totally this....i proposed this question for Q&A but seems that wasnt interesting enough to bring any answer:

ENDGAME RVR AND POPULATION BALANCE:
With the actual design of Campaign its imposible to achive both RVR-Endgame and population balance. if you reach a perfect balance of population (50%/50%) the campaign enter in stalemate and stop progressing, if the server had a perfect balance for 24h/day cities will never happen.

(IMO) The current design encourage:
-Throw: players want to play endgame, dont bother to lose to reach a bigger reward.
-Xrealm: to overpopulated faction to make campaign advace faster.
-Population imbalance: right now, more imbalance = more endgame.

QUESTION: is there any plans to remake how RVR-Endgame happens to avoid this issues?


viewtopic.php?f=8&t=43588


Until this sistem changes WE NEED MORE XREALMERS TO OVERPOP SIDE AND MORE UNBALANCE...

But this feels like a core game design flaw; one that could possibly originate from the lack of a 3rd faction, as seen in DaoC. I mean, what do you expect a team of volunteers with no budget and little control over the codebase to do? Change RvR? How????

I not agree..."this team of volunteers with no budget nd little control over the codebase" have done a awesome job, in some aspects better than original war...

You dont need to make a "complete overhaul" to game design....you only need to change "how things happen"...for example: "the realm who reach 100k kills in RVR will siege the enemy City"...and suddenly you can reach to engame content even if you have a perfect balance population 365days/year, and sudenly you make kills in RvR matter...

Its only a example, could be a mix of requeriments: lock X number of zones + XXXXXX number of kills + win XXX scs....you dont need to overhaul nothing, just so easy like change the requeriments to city happen.

[Ekundu01]

Unless the system we have in place is changed for end game content you will never see a population balance. Most of the population that is after the next gear set is going to do what ever they need to do for that to happen. All gear sets from orvr from t1 all the way to vanq are from kills/zone flips/keep bags. Once you hit the invader/warlord/sov sets you are now gated behind that game mode. You go from just playing the campaign to just needing specific events to happen to make any real progress. Sure we get invaders or royals in bags if you have the tok unlock from zone flips but not everyone has hours upon hours to flip zones for a whole 7 medals when they can wait for a city to happen and log in for it because most guilds spam discords when city is going down.

On Live Whole medals for all gear dropped based on the RR of the player killed and those medals could be broken down for more of the tier below it and you could get gear from cities and players still dodged fights when it came to cities if they were trying to gear out. It is the nature of the beast when you tie end game progression to system we have now. Once pve catches up with equal gear sets it might not be as bad but that seems like it might be really far away so this unbalanced population will remain for a while.

[kirraha]

If anyone cares, here are the reasons why Destro has -always- had more players than Order. Yes, always. No, the population does not 'ebb and flow' in the long term, Destro -always- has more.

1. Destro has better looking Important Classes. Order's important classes (slayer, white lion, kotbs, all healers) generally look dumb by comparison, so Order players pick the cool looking classes like engi, SW, WH, which are also the worst.

2. Because of this, Destro has always had a more even class distribution, making it far easier to find melee and tanks and healers, where as Order has always had a huge amount of RDPS and few tanks or healers or melee.

3. Because of this, Destro wins vastly more often because their available pool of classes to compose parties with is just better.

4. Because of this, Destro gets geared faster.

5. Because of this, Destro wins even more because now they have an overall gear advantage.

6. Because of this, players feel more incentivized to roll Destro because they have all the advantages and consistently win, particularly players who are inclined to go through the effort of actually making groups (Order almost never organizes outside of a few guilds).

7. Point 3-6 snowballs ad infinium leading to even greater population and gear gaps in the future.

EDIT:

Oh, I almost forgot!

8. Because Destro wins so much more often, the average Destro player has far more passive gold coming in, which lets them buy pots and talismans easier, leading to an even bigger gear gap.

It always comes back to, player mentality.

Ppl seem capable of finding new things to blame for one side being the weaker on. Order has been strong in many times aswell, but atm it seems like destro is a bigger number in some times. We used to balance our raids after the numbers. If we see order being underdog, we log order. If we see destro being underdog, we log destro. Issue came with the lockout time, and yet still ppl demangs longer lockout timers? Cause they think that will fix ppls bad mentality.

I have played since serverstart. I took some breaks througout the years but ofc real times sometimes demands fulltime attention. I concider myself a casual player. I can get rly decent gear in very short amount of time. I can't understand how other causals have that issue. Even if I play on the ''underdog'' side. I do it solo lot's of times. I do 6man or wb too, but mainly my tanks Vanq gear has been grinden through working zones one by one, getting bags and gear that way. IT IS EASY.

You also get invader and Royal in bags now aswell. You don't even need to win zones to have a chance to get these bags, just contribute every evening a little at a time. The issue have atm, is that they don't have any pug leaders. Their mentality (Destro has is too) is often very weak. They give up, they complain and whine before things even gone lost. I feel no sympathy for these ppl. They want everything served on a silverplate.

Order has VERY good setups. and yeah they wanna roleplay Engi or Wh, but then their loss of wins in the bigger picture is on them, along with the ones who avoid fights, sit in the keeps and yell about how unfair the game is on the forums.

[marafado]

So here is a hot take on population balance - the game reward system (as it stands) isn't built to have a balanced population as rewards come primarily from bag rolls, forts and cities.

Balanced population leads to stagnation in the lakes which leads to fewer rewards. You actually want something like a 55-45 (or greater) population split at most times to keep the campaigns moving forward.

Totally this....i proposed this question for Q&A but seems that wasnt interesting enough to bring any answer:

ENDGAME RVR AND POPULATION BALANCE:
With the actual design of Campaign its imposible to achive both RVR-Endgame and population balance. if you reach a perfect balance of population (50%/50%) the campaign enter in stalemate and stop progressing, if the server had a perfect balance for 24h/day cities will never happen.

(IMO) The current design encourage:
-Throw: players want to play endgame, dont bother to lose to reach a bigger reward.
-Xrealm: to overpopulated faction to make campaign advace faster.
-Population imbalance: right now, more imbalance = more endgame.

QUESTION: is there any plans to remake how RVR-Endgame happens to avoid this issues?


viewtopic.php?f=8&t=43588


Until this sistem changes WE NEED MORE XREALMERS TO OVERPOP SIDE AND MORE UNBALANCE...

"the game reward system"
need to think a way to fix players on just 1 faction, the current system in an rvr game is no good for the comunity.
i play on destro side, for wat i know the only real destro guild we have is fmj, the other "major" guilds just jump from side to side to "help the underdogs".

i think this game can ofer a much better experience, if we have a strong comunity in both realms, not the current "help the underdogs" playstile.

[Opethian]

Are P&P and TUP flipping sides to 'help the underdog' though? When did either guild last flip to Order for any significant period of time, i.e. play on Order for months at a time with a frequent and pronounced presence in the lakes? Have they ever done that other than to prove a point that Order concerns about class balance aren't true by bringing some of the best players in the game over to Order to win a few city instances and therefore claim Order just needs to be better at the game?

I've been here for a year now and though there is an often touted narrative on here about the population ebbing and flowing, that, in reality, has not been true for the last year. We're heading to EU prime at the moment and the population in tier 2+ is 57 / 43 in favour of Destruction. This has been the case almost every day during prime time for the last year. Getting zerged in the lakes led people to switch sides, which made the imbalance greater, which then reduced the recruiting pool for remaining Order only guilds, which creates a negative feedback loop of new players coming into this competitive PvP game and not wanting to join the side getting stomped and outnumbered, further escalating the problem. Order's won how many cities recently? We overall won a single city attack out of all of them last week to my knowledge. Yes, we push to city, but we all know at this point that a significant amount of that is driven by x-realmers, who are Destruction mains, pushing to city and then logging onto their Destruction mains. Destruction is essentially playing with itself.

I can't understand how people can defend the population imbalance as being necessary. If city is the endgame it should be an event and not a twice daily occurrence which Order almost always loses. I fear if it continues in the present trajectory the population position will get worse due to the negative feedback loop and then ultimately Order will collapse. There is already a pronounced absence of players. We put out enough players this morning for 6 city instances. This time last year there would have been 20. I hope it doesn't happen but I am concerned it will and a game I really enjoy will end because I'll either have to join Destruction and play against virtually no competition or quit for lack of people to play with on Order.

[Naelar]

Late last summer, there were plenty of days during EU prime where Order was pushing IC faster than the cooldown (resetting the campaign).