Realm Champions not needed, we need Time Zone Champions

[GamesBond]

I would appreciate if we could read relevant feedback that would clarify your opinions on the suggestion we presented in the in-game survey. For the past dozen posts, the replies are towards 24h player-based realm lockout system (which isn't what we're going for) and a permanent single faction lockout (which is surely never going to happen). The in-game survey asks you about a lockout that resets in the morning.

What's the system that we need feedback on?
A 24h server-based realm lockout. Technically, it's a 24h lockout on paper, but it's not relevant because it isn't affected by when you login and logout: It doesn't punish you for 24h, it doesn't restrict you for 2 evenings, considering that the majority play in their respective time-zone's evening, sleep, go to work/school/uni and then login in the next evening.

NO: 24h player-based realm lockout:
I believe that the 24h realm-lockout that you're worried about is one that starts from the moment you logout, which means if you started playing at 8PM EU time and logged out at 11:30PM, you cannot switch realms till the next day at 11:30PM - making it inconvenient to play with friends/guilds. This is not what we're aiming for.

YES: 24h server-based realm lockout (the one we're suggesting):
The actual lockout we're suggesting is your own evening on that single day, so if you started playing at 8PM EU time and logged out at 11:30PM, your lockout will reset while you're still asleep. This means that the next day you play, you could play again on either sides. Even if you woke up in the morning on a Sunday because the reset will be at an early time, like 6:00 AM server time.

This whole survey remains the first step and the whole idea may not even see the light once we finish gathering and listening to feedback.
- We still need to interpret the survey data internally
- We still need to read the feedback from the forum and the survey box
- The CM team still needs to discuss the whole idea with the RvR Focus Group

[Sulorie]

Whatever you are going to do, don't let the lockout mechanic affect people doing sc or pve and swapping sides for those activities. There should be no limit.

[bradbury111]

What about the people of a different region that play during the server-based realm reset?
For them is like a 24h player-based realm lockout.

[GamesBond]

Whatever you are going to do, don't let the lockout mechanic affect people doing sc or pve and swapping sides for those activities. There should be no limit.

For sure, this feature will not be affected by any RvR lockout decision.

What about the people of a different region that play during the server-based realm reset?
For them is like a 24h player-based realm lockout.

It'll be either easier for them or the same outcome, 1 evening/gaming session.

[Bozzax]

At this point run 2 weeks 96h lockout and be done with it.

Game will not be better, ppl will play less and this pointless discussion will end

[GamesBond]

At this point run 2 weeks 96h lockout and be done with it.

Game will not be better, ppl will play less and this pointless discussion will end

[dwyur]

The fact a 24H lockout is the subject of the survey and truly being considered, further limiting the small amount of people that still play on the server, instead of something meant to promote more players logging in & participating in any form of endgame, is discouraging.

[pvprangergod]

I would appreciate if we could read relevant feedback that would clarify your opinions on the suggestion we presented in the in-game survey. For the past dozen posts, the replies are towards 24h player-based realm lockout system (which isn't what we're going for) and a permanent single faction lockout (which is surely never going to happen). The in-game survey asks you about a lockout that resets in the morning.

What's the system that we need feedback on?
A 24h server-based realm lockout. Technically, it's a 24h lockout on paper, but it's not relevant because it isn't affected by when you login and logout: It doesn't punish you for 24h, it doesn't restrict you for 2 evenings, considering that the majority play in their respective time-zone's evening, sleep, go to work/school/uni and then login in the next evening.

NO: 24h player-based realm lockout:
I believe that the 24h realm-lockout that you're worried about is one that starts from the moment you logout, which means if you started playing at 8PM EU time and logged out at 11:30PM, you cannot switch realms till the next day at 11:30PM - making it inconvenient to play with friends/guilds. This is not what we're aiming for.

YES: 24h server-based realm lockout (the one we're suggesting):
The actual lockout we're suggesting is your own evening on that single day, so if you started playing at 8PM EU time and logged out at 11:30PM, your lockout will reset while you're still asleep. This means that the next day you play, you could play again on either sides. Even if you woke up in the morning on a Sunday because the reset will be at an early time, like 6:00 AM server time.

This whole survey remains the first step and the whole idea may not even see the light once we finish gathering and listening to feedback.
- We still need to interpret the survey data internally
- We still need to read the feedback from the forum and the survey box
- The CM team still needs to discuss the whole idea with the RvR Focus Group

WHAT IS 1 REASON TO DO ANY OF THAT?

[Uchoo]

One faction/side per game it's the main rule of any game since ancient times
By asking for an option to change the faction at will, it's like not respecting the rules or one implies that the rules should not exist in the first place. It's like asking a referee that you, a soccer player, you want to play in both teams at the same time.
Without rules, there is no game to be played.
Also, X-realming cuts from the game's immersion, everyone is everyone, why even play against Destro since Destro are Order players and vice-versa?
Trust me, this option does not exist in any other official game because it's flawed and illogical in the first place.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Why should people be limited from playing half of the game? Should I never see Altdorf because I decided to play Destro first? What's the point of a rule without a purpose? What is the PURPOSE of this rule of yours? What does it accomplish? I can tell you from experience on live that it just led to one side massively zerging on a majority of servers. Is that the result you want? When servers merged and people were allowed to faction swap, RvR grew more competitive. You claim that it's flawed and illogical and that I should trust you. Tell me WHY you believe this. What is the FOUNDATION of this belief besides the fact that it's the only thing you've ever known?

Why would a soccer player should be limited to play only for his team? Because he identifies with his team, because it's normal in order for the game to take place?
The rule for a player to play only at one team generates sense and structure. It accomplishes a climate fundamental for a game to exist in the first place.
The foundation of my beliefs resides in observational phenomenons of other games where you get restrictive faction lock from the start.Noone of them presents a problem of faction imbalance at a level of ''pathology''.
I didnt played Live, but my guess is that the one sided faction domination on certain servers was the result of overall game population downfall and not necessarily a faction lock because in stable pop games, this is not the case.

Okay so you don't have a reason, it's just the only thing you've ever known, what you state as "observational phenomena" lmao. That soccer analogy has no absolutely no correlation with this game btw. Let me try to fix it for you.

"Hey want to play soccer this weekend, we have enough people to make a game if you play on our team."

"Nah sorry I can't, we can only play for our own team, it's a rule. I guess no soccer this weekend."

[pvprangergod]

The don't make a contract with their blood for one team?

They go where the rewards are better...oh no...this soccer argument doesn't work as expected...

Yea, imagine soccer players changing sides during a match on the winning side and generating ''a zerg'' just because it's possible.

IMAGINE IF SOCCER MATCHES HAD SLAYERS WITH RAMPAGE, HOW WOULD YOU BLOCK THE BALL FROM ENTERING THE GOAL? NERF RAMPAGE OP ORDER BIAS SOCCER MATCH OMG