Patch Notes 30/04/2022

[Shogun4138]

City in timers and lotd on timers, just seems to take away the fluidity of the game and if course eliminates player control for said destinations.

[Wam]

The city siege schedule is now changed to a rotating schedule instead of a weighted random times. This is made to try and create city sieges in prime times for various time zones.

- EU early (20:00 Altdorf time)
- EU late (22:00 Altdorf time)
- NA East (00:00 Altdorf time) - this hour will be adjusted as per NA community feedback
- EU early (20:00 Altdorf time)
- EU late (22:00 Altdorf time)
- NA West (03:00 Altdorf time) - this hour will be adjusted as per NA community feedback

Stage end rewards adjusted to the following:

Win: 10 * (stage + cityRating)
Loss: 4 * (stage + cityRating)

The "Routed" debuff for losers is no longer applied

Two steps forward one step back... if intended changes and more "competitive" cities happen you have taken away incentives... there is not too much difference between win and lose, with it being end game and more crests on the line there is more pressure to perform well and play to win... now its back to RNG bag simulator and getting pops/bags is only thing that matters not so much win or lose.

Premades already show with silly setups and quit early instance 1... trolling their allies and their enemies equally because they are only there for Ez wins. Server rule of dont be a **** never gets applied equally to quiters in city, it happens so much people come for s1 if it doesnt go their way just take their ball go home and quit.

So soon we will have more spicey cities again fighting over table scraps? where you would earn far more just to win/zerg surfing in orvr in equal time.

As for comparing to scenarios that is disingenious arguement because scenarios are lowballed and their reward should be increased as its out of sync with the others, especially when you dont always get pops and have to wait for action. Cities are end game content and should have more prestige considering they are not always available.

The positive is fixing the queue times, so it is more fair across the board and majority of players now have the choice of attending which they previously didn't have.

[Tesq]

Can't find a sense in this profanity AI thing when game alredy have one in client... far better update that or if the client would report the words to gm and then human being would look after it if there is any need of action or not. I'm worry an automatic system like this it gona make simply a lots of problems.

[Asderas27]

Weird decision to make timings better but rewards bad. Why not tone down rewards a little bit instead of chopping them down to the previous amount for supposedly "endgame" content ? Machete approach always triumphs over scalpel approach here it seems

[Sulorie]

Weird decision to make timings better but rewards bad. Why not tone down rewards a little bit instead of chopping them down to the previous amount for supposedly "endgame" content ? Machete approach always triumphs over scalpel approach here it seems

The previous amount was a lot lower. You miss the addition of stage number instead of city stars only in the formula.

[Gravord]

The city siege schedule is now changed to a rotating schedule instead of a weighted random times. This is made to try and create city sieges in prime times for various time zones.

- EU early (20:00 Altdorf time)
- EU late (22:00 Altdorf time)
- NA East (00:00 Altdorf time) - this hour will be adjusted as per NA community feedback
- EU early (20:00 Altdorf time)
- EU late (22:00 Altdorf time)
- NA West (03:00 Altdorf time) - this hour will be adjusted as per NA community feedback

Stage end rewards adjusted to the following:

Win: 10 * (stage + cityRating)
Loss: 4 * (stage + cityRating)

The "Routed" debuff for losers is no longer applied

Two steps forward one step back... if intended changes and more "competitive" cities happen you have taken away incentives... there is not too much difference between win and lose, with it being end game and more crests on the line there is more pressure to perform well and play to win... now its back to RNG bag simulator and getting pops/bags is only thing that matters not so much win or lose.

Premades already show with silly setups and quit early instance 1... trolling their allies and their enemies equally because they are only there for Ez wins. Server rule of dont be a **** never gets applied equally to quiters in city, it happens so much people come for s1 if it doesnt go their way just take their ball go home and quit.

So soon we will have more spicey cities again fighting over table scraps? where you would earn far more just to win/zerg surfing in orvr in equal time.

As for comparing to scenarios that is disingenious arguement because scenarios are lowballed and their reward should be increased as its out of sync with the others, especially when you dont always get pops and have to wait for action. Cities are end game content and should have more prestige considering they are not always available.

The positive is fixing the queue times, so it is more fair across the board and majority of players now have the choice of attending which they previously didn't have.

There are far better incentives that can be implemented to cities over mindless reward bloat. Throw 5k crest for losing side in city, will it make it better? Or just yet again mandatory to attend for the reward?

[Repulsion]

Cities having great rewards, especially now that you can't PvD two cities per day, is a must; not just an incentive.
This coming from someone who doesnt really care for them nor participates half the time.
2 hours of hectic sweat for less crests than 2 hours of chill zergsurf sounds plain wrong.


MORE IMPORTANTLY - and this has been glaringly wrong from the 1st moment - Scenarios should give more crests. Getting geared should be much slower compared to playing the campaign but at this point its not just slower its nearly mathematically impossible.
And yes I know the problems of instanced content in an MMO AND that it wasn't even possible to get Sov gear from scenarios; but as it stands it's just too low.

[Wam]

There are far better incentives that can be implemented to cities over mindless reward bloat. Throw 5k crest for losing side in city, will it make it better? Or just yet again mandatory to attend for the reward?

What incentives? Royal weapons when?

There is no mindless reward bloat, you are arguing again in bad faith going to straight away too extremes to make a arguement sounds like your arguement is very thin to begin with... nobody mentioned "thousands" of crests for winning a city, let alone losing a city... but in one this threads previous examples... there was a 90 crest difference between winning and losing... so in that system someone who afk's and is on the losing side, could win just as much if not more crests via AFK and BAGS over someone who is active and tries... sounds like that system is open to exploitation and you see it all the time... also sounds like some people will also just take easier path of ORVR and skip cities to zerg orvr and overall pop of cities will be lower than it should be for end game.

one thing that in my opinion should be added that hasn't been discussed... is a reward for people queing and not getting a pop, something neither insulting or over rewarding but respecting their time and effort for wanting to participate but system/population failing them on those occasions to provide a opportunity. That is one of the most negative part of the system and if that can be tackled like other negative issues with cities then that is a plus and more players will be happy. (not adovcating free empty instances to PVE, just similar amount in the mail to the current baby rage quiters of S1 get)

[Evilspinnre]

There are far better incentives that can be implemented to cities over mindless reward bloat. Throw 5k crest for losing side in city, will it make it better? Or just yet again mandatory to attend for the reward?

Haven't you queued multiple times without getting a pop? You think decreasing rewards will results in more pops?

[Gravord]

There are far better incentives that can be implemented to cities over mindless reward bloat. Throw 5k crest for losing side in city, will it make it better? Or just yet again mandatory to attend for the reward?

What incentives? Royal weapons when?

There is no mindless reward bloat, you are arguing again in bad faith going to straight away too extremes to make a arguement sounds like your arguement is very thin to begin with... nobody mentioned "thousands" of crests for winning a city, let alone losing a city... but in one this threads previous examples... there was a 90 crest difference between winning and losing... so in that system someone who afk's and is on the losing side, could win just as much if not more crests via AFK and BAGS over someone who is active and tries... sounds like that system is open to exploitation and you see it all the time... also sounds like some people will also just take easier path of ORVR and skip cities to zerg orvr and overall pop of cities will be lower than it should be for end game.

one thing that in my opinion should be added that hasn't been discussed... is a reward for people queing and not getting a pop, something neither insulting or over rewarding but respecting their time and effort for wanting to participate but system/population failing them on those occasions to provide a opportunity. That is one of the most negative part of the system and if that can be tackled like other negative issues with cities then that is a plus and more players will be happy. (not adovcating free empty instances to PVE, just similar amount in the mail to the current baby rage quiters of S1 get)

3 steps to make cities better:
- better scheduling (already mostly done)
- faction bound rewards allowing players bring best chars for a good fight and provide good setups for their warbands while progressing account
- matchmaking giving best possible chance for fair fights