Patch Notes 30/04/2022

[Sulorie]

There is any chance to get back the old campaing system?

That's what I'd like to know as well. Sure, the new iteration has its advantages, but honestly I always liked the unpredictability of a city siege.
The way it directly followed from a player-driven effort was something unique that we had compared to other MMORPGs out there.

The problem was, such efforts mostly lead to sieges during low pop hours, where population was one-sided, so the bigger realm was able to lock all zones uncontested.

[Albais]

There is any chance to get back the old campaing system?

That's what I'd like to know as well. Sure, the new iteration has its advantages, but honestly I always liked the unpredictability of a city siege.
The way it directly followed from a player-driven effort was something unique that we had compared to other MMORPGs out there.

The problem was, such efforts mostly lead to sieges during low pop hours, where population was one-sided, so the bigger realm was able to lock all zones uncontested.

True, that's one of the advantages of the new system. I also think it's overall better to have a schedule so that more people can attend if they want to. But I really liked the feeling of pushing the enemy back to their capital when trying to take forts / preparing for a defense of my own capital when our forts got taken. To me, it felt more meaningful to take keeps and forts knowing that my realm might be able to assault the enemy capital as a direct consequence of our combined efforts. Even when I wasn't able to join the sieges myself (and that was the case more often than not since I play during EU prime time), it still felt good to be a part of the push that made it happen.

[Scrilian]

>A profanity detector

[Akalukz]

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?

Spoiler:

What incentives? Royal weapons when?

Spoiler:

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

Account bound rewards from Cities would be great. The expedition resources seems to have been a successful test of this. Take away the "guaranteed" 5-star city, make each Fort Win/Loss +/- X amount of stars, this may help break up the zerg as well, then make the city sieged a random pick at the start of the city. Could look into realm bonuses for Fort Wins/Defends, to bring back to appeal of the Fort fights.

[Kpi]

There is any chance to get back the old campaing system?

That's what I'd like to know as well. Sure, the new iteration has its advantages, but honestly I always liked the unpredictability of a city siege.
The way it directly followed from a player-driven effort was something unique that we had compared to other MMORPGs out there.

The problem was, such efforts mostly lead to sieges during low pop hours, where population was one-sided, so the bigger realm was able to lock all zones uncontested.

Not always, i remember a lot of time working with the alliance for push to city and after hard sieges finally can do it. Sometimes we get wiped and destros stop us, but the campaing have a goal. This was awesome and did the game unique.

Now, the RVR is do the week event and zerg without any reason.

[navis]

I'm sorry to hear we lost Avocetti, spent many a great night's RvR in his warband.

[nik89]

3 city pops tonight, next one 8am Altdorf time. A lot of players didn't get pops as not much incentive to q, easier to farm crests with aao in the lakes.

Revert the crest change, or find a middle ground between the two. And/or increase the renown gained from stages.

Previous night time city at 1am had only 4 instances and didnt have 60/40 faction split. Theres no negative impact on attendance from reverting silly patch.
Also its already middle ground as was pointed out in this topic few times.

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.

I think you may be fairly alone in thinking this crest nerf is a good thing.

You will make a lot more crests running around in the lakes instead of a city.
If you win and get bags you will get more than other content, but it is not enough to incentivize people to join.
if there is no tantalizing reward, even just for participation if not winning, people will just stop queuing if they lose often.



What is the harm in giving players more crests for this game mode? odds are random players/groups will end up getting farmed anyway.
Did we need to make it so unrewarding on top of that?

The bigger problem, in relation to rewards, is ensuring fights are even/matched better. Getting stomped/stomping is boring.

[Sulorie]

I think you may be fairly alone in thinking this crest nerf is a good thing.

You will make a lot more crests running around in the lakes instead of a city.
If you win and get bags you will get more than other content, but it is not enough to incentivize people to join.

How much crests do you earn in a winning and losing city without bags, can you tell me?

How much crests do you earn in rvr in the same time frame in a pug warband with mediocre dps in your group?

[nik89]

I think you may be fairly alone in thinking this crest nerf is a good thing.

You will make a lot more crests running around in the lakes instead of a city.
If you win and get bags you will get more than other content, but it is not enough to incentivize people to join.

How much crests do you earn in a winning and losing city without bags, can you tell me?

How much crests do you earn in rvr in the same time frame in a pug warband with mediocre dps in your group?

The formula has been quoted here, but it's on the order of ~70 crests a stage for winning(IF you can) and ~28 per stage for losing.

I think your second question is setting up a strawman.

Even IF you have bad dps, you can likely get something following around organized groups or running boxes.
If the zones aren't moving quickly, you can leach. You just have to know how to do it.
It's usually just a matter of will.
The only thing that crushes that is getting zerged.

If things are moving fast then you make a huge amount of crests.
You make a lot from sieges, and even more from forts. They are very rewarding for the effort.

[Sulorie]

The formula has been quoted here, but it's on the order of ~70 crests a stage for winning(IF you can) and ~28 per stage for losing.

I think your second question is setting up a strawman.

Even IF you have bad dps, you can likely get something following around organized groups or running boxes.
If the zones aren't moving quickly, you can leach. You just have to know how to do it.
It's usually just a matter of will.
The only thing that crushes that is getting zerged.

If things are moving fast then you make a huge amount of crests.
You make a lot from sieges, and even more from forts. They are very rewarding for the effort.

That's no strawman, this is what you get in warbands outside of high rr/gear premade warbands, where all pull their weight. Additionally it's not like all in those typical pug warbands earn the same as not all groups are equally strong. You expect a new player to get anything else? Kill drops got a little bit randomized but the group with most damage still has the edge.

I expected you don't know the numbers, therefore I asked and my guess was correct.
As cities are currently mostly 5*, I will use this as basement.
[Edit]
Stage 1 win without bags and kill drops gives 60 crests, stage 2 70 and stage 3 80. That's 210 crests in quite short time.
[/Edit]

Now take the losing side, which doesn't even bother to fight and on top you are unlucky and get no bag.
Stage 1 24, stage 2 28 and stage 3 32. 84 crests without doing anything for like 1 hour. You don't get this in a pug warband. This is just 4 crests less per stage compared to pre-"nerf" [deleted].

With fast moving you mean no opposition and quickly locking zones?


/Edited due to wrong information