[Suggestion] Vanquisher at RR 45

[Alubert]

While I completely agree with the suggestion to adjust the RR ranks, I fear it would make another major problem i the gear progression even worse. Or atleast will not solve it.

A big problem atm is that the rr-progression is so out of touch with the gear progression. The gain of War Crests is so slow, that it just makes sense to get Vanq or BL via PVE and then just grind RR+Crest to go straight to Souv and entirely skipping Inv and Warlord.

I think there needs to be a smoother gear progresssion, maybe via gold bag drops for Inv (at rr60+) and Warlord (at rr70+) or something else. Maybe someone has a good idea how to solve that.

I really think this would also bind more players to the game with a steady progression instead of farming for months and suddenly turning rr78, buying full sov and "finish the game".

I absolutely disagree with this. Since we have a unified currency WAR CRESTS everything is definitely easier. I recently made a new character. I went from t1 to t4 in two weeks. RR 50+ and 4k warcrests in my backpack. I bought a few rvr sets and weapons along the way. Really leveling up and getting currency is trivial in the current time.

[Nameless]

Imo vanq should be open at rr40, reduce the price but not by much, imo gold bag drop rate make it pretty easy to obtain.
Next lower invader set cost and rr req, make invader drop for all forts bags and make the ring occupy 3rd and 4rd slot or remove restrictions at all. That will add more set mixing, even at near bis lvl

[Sinisterror]

While I completely agree with the suggestion to adjust the RR ranks, I fear it would make another major problem i the gear progression even worse. Or atleast will not solve it.

A big problem atm is that the rr-progression is so out of touch with the gear progression. The gain of War Crests is so slow, that it just makes sense to get Vanq or BL via PVE and then just grind RR+Crest to go straight to Souv and entirely skipping Inv and Warlord.

I think there needs to be a smoother gear progresssion, maybe via gold bag drops for Inv (at rr60+) and Warlord (at rr70+) or something else. Maybe someone has a good idea how to solve that.

I really think this would also bind more players to the game with a steady progression instead of farming for months and suddenly turning rr78, buying full sov and "finish the game".

I absolutely disagree with this. Since we have a unified currency WAR CRESTS everything is definitely easier. I recently made a new character. I went from t1 to t4 in two weeks. RR 50+ and 4k warcrests in my backpack. I bought a few rvr sets and weapons along the way. Really leveling up and getting currency is trivial in the current time.

Yes when you have everything ready and multiple chars at rr80 ofc you are going to have high rr and warcrests, you got the guild and friends but NEW PEOPLE do not. I have played this game since 2008 and after they removed XP reduced scroll I remember leveling 3 chars doing only solo queing no RvR and all of them were rr30 something when they dinged lvl40, I didnt check played time but im sure it was easily few days.


That is obviously insanely too low amount, and here is the WTF/WHY part. Only Solo queing vs RvR Afk/Following the zerg and doing nothing will net you SO MUCH MORE renown and warcrests. This means that you can be rr80 and have Zerg surfed and dont know anything about the PvP, but doing Sc's in same time you are rr30 but you know spesifiks and actually how to play this game! And i dont know if this is still the case(if not then its ninja changed) but when you play Solo(not in a party) you will get less sc pops,less renown, less everything JUST BECAUSE you are not in a party.

Try it. Do a new account and dont tell anyone who you are, and dont send anything to your char from another account and do only solo que's and then you realize that dropping the low lvl sets is LONG OVERDUE and bare minimum.

Sauer's chart full support 100%

[Caith]

While the relative nature of competitiveness is valid, the issue isn’t just about raw power but about making sure new players can meaningfully participate without feeling overwhelmed.

Well, if we're going full semantics - the only way to fix the issue in this logical context is to give a new player a full Sov set at 40, otherwise there would always be an subjective gap of effectiveness between different player demography.

By adjusting the progression, we can bridge that gap, giving them a fairer chance to contribute.

The following question is SHOULD the gap be bridged, as it is actually this gap that stimulate player behavioral pattern to progress the game?
The idea to bridge the gap just a little by providing Vanq at 40 is inconsistent, as we don't have any objective data that says that Vanq set is THE pivotal point in gear progression that enables any meaningful participation in RvR content. In different peoples' optics it as well could be Invader, Triumphant, Warlord, or Sov.

Personally I'd say that Conq is this point, and a hundred of other respondents will have a hundred of different opinions on the issue.

This would also improve retention by creating a less frustrating early experience.

This is an assumption that is not backed by any data, whereas the decrease in LT is a fact - you do suggest to take away a part, albeit not a big one but still significant, from player progression framework.

[Sinisterror]

While the relative nature of competitiveness is valid, the issue isn’t just about raw power but about making sure new players can meaningfully participate without feeling overwhelmed.

Well, if we're going full semantics - the only way to fix the issue in this logical context is to give a new player a full Sov set at 40, otherwise there would always be an subjective gap of effectiveness between different player demography.

By adjusting the progression, we can bridge that gap, giving them a fairer chance to contribute.

The following question is SHOULD the gap be bridged, as it is actually this gap that stimulate player behavioral pattern to progress the game?
The idea to bridge the gap just a little by providing Vanq at 40 is inconsistent, as we don't have any objective data that says that Vanq set is THE pivotal point in gear progression that enables any meaningful participation in RvR content. In different peoples' optics it as well could be Invader, Triumphant, Warlord, or Sov.

Personally I'd say that Conq is this point, and a hundred of other respondents will have a hundred of different opinions on the issue.

This would also improve retention by creating a less frustrating early experience.

This is an assumption that is not backed by any data, whereas the decrease in LT is a fact - you do suggest to take away a part, albeit not a big one but still significant, from player progression framework.

Im sorry but you dont know what you are talking about or you have an agenda. It's obvious that yes the GAP should be lowered. It's obvious that player retention would improve. Vanq/Opp is Obviously the pivotal Point. Example. AM with 6pc Vanquisher and The Sight wpn from City instances will have 05s cast time reduction+25% Cast time Reduction(they stack) and 2x Ap procs giving you freedom of not using resto burst so 1 more tactic slot! This is huge leap to what the class was before and Might as well be BiS because its same as Vict/Triumph but with abit less stats.

Anyone who truely has played this game on both sides and has at least tank,melee dps,ranged dps and healer and know how to play all of them knows everybody should make alts, and play as many chars you can and that process to lvl alts should be encouraged in every possible way.

I dont buy the argument that there is not enough people for middle tier, espesially with original 9ae cap. There is hunters vale but there is no middle tier Pve instance, Gunbad you can do 32 but red eye is lvl 40 but def should be lowered to 35 or so with Conq/Domi. If there was true middle tier again with reduced xp scroll and 3 tactics not 4, i would only play middle tier! That is the best and most balanced pvp you can have in this game atm, Imo.

[Caith]

It's obvious that yes the GAP should be lowered.

Obvious to who?

Vanq/Opp is Obviously the pivotal Point.

Oviously to who, again?

AM with 6pc Vanquisher and The Sight wpn from City instances...

Thats classical selection bias, you cannot prove a statistical point with one selected example.

Anyone who truely has played this game on both sides and has at least tank,melee dps,ranged dps and healer and know how to play all of them knows everybody should make alts, and play as many chars you can and that process to lvl alts should be encouraged in every possible way.

Anyone? Since when your the voice of anyone, speak for yourself, please. Also, extrapolation of specific modus operandi on all the player base is a thing that should be avoided, jfyi.


All in all I dont appreciate a discussion where your subjective take on things is considered socially shared, because it is not, it is a discussion manipulation and a lie, to put it straight.

I came back to the game after a four year break several weeks ago. I had several fresh 40 lvl characters in Merc/Anni and zero knowledge about the game and current meta. I never felt overwhelmed in RVR in my equipment and weeks later my main is almost 70, geared and working on its future Sov set, and my alt is at his Vanq.
I AM the legendary new playerbase that would be outgeared and overwhelmed in RVR by your opinion, and I dont share your sentiment. Early 40 progression plays just fine, problem lies in late post-Vanq progression, where a lot of sets are not good enough to justify the investment.

[Farrul]

I can agree up until vanq gear to help the new players.

I have no idea why you lowered the RR of Warlord which is basically an offensive SoV set already, nor Victour/Triumphant which are BIS at 4 pieces. There is no need for that.

P.S. In fact the grind already offers hand holding ever since the unified war crests system , back when Cities were endgame and not some scheduled nonsense, when Royal Crests mattered for endgame gear this game had greater ambitions than the lazy grind game it became today.

Imho this game need more end game ambitions not less, real cities endgame, better RR 90+ gear, Tyrant Gear, make it feel fresh again. The newbies can get lowered Vanq gear ( and maybe even lowered costs, i can agree to that) but beyond that this game should be hungry for ambitions, some real endgame RPG itemization.

It needs to have the soul and spirit from the live game back, not stagnation. If you did this A LOT of players would come back.

[saupreusse]

I can agree up until vanq gear to help the new players.

I have no idea why you lowered the RR of Warlord which is basically an offensive SoV set already, nor Victour/Triumphant which are BIS at 4 pieces. There is no need for that.

P.S. In fact the grind already offers hand holding ever since the unified war crests system , back when Cities were endgame and not some scheduled nonsense, when Royal Crests mattered for endgame gear this game had greater ambitions than the lazy grind game it became today.

Imho this game need more end game ambitions not less, real cities endgame, better RR 90+ gear, Tyrant Gear, make it feel fresh again. The newbies can get lowered Vanq gear ( and maybe even lowered costs, i can agree to that) but beyond that this game should be hungry for ambitions, some real endgame RPG itemization.

It needs to have the soul and spirit from the live game back, not stagnation. If you did this A LOT of players would come back.

I’ve created an example of a gear progression chart, which can be used as a guideline or adapted in a different way. The key takeaway is that the Vanquisher gear is now accessible at RR 45. All other information in the table is provided for context and to help clarify the full scope of my suggestion.


Edit to also answer Panzerkasper:

While I completely agree with the suggestion to adjust the RR ranks, I fear it would make another major problem i the gear progression even worse. Or atleast will not solve it.

A big problem atm is that the rr-progression is so out of touch with the gear progression. The gain of War Crests is so slow, that it just makes sense to get Vanq or BL via PVE and then just grind RR+Crest to go straight to Souv and entirely skipping Inv and Warlord.

I think there needs to be a smoother gear progresssion, maybe via gold bag drops for Inv (at rr60+) and Warlord (at rr70+) or something else. Maybe someone has a good idea how to solve that.

I really think this would also bind more players to the game with a steady progression instead of farming for months and suddenly turning rr78, buying full sov and "finish the game".

Agreed, but solving this issue is a whole different challenge and goes beyond the scope of this discussion.

[saupreusse]

Well, if we're going full semantics - the only way to fix the issue in this logical context is to give a new player a full Sov set at 40, otherwise there would always be an subjective gap of effectiveness between different player demography.

While you're right that a full Sov set at 40 would close the gap, doing so would eliminate the entire progression system. It’s not just a subjective gap, there’s an objective difference in gear effectiveness. My goal isn’t to radically overhaul the system, but rather to adjust it in a way that preserves progression while minimizing the gear disparity. If everyone were given max gear immediately, progression would lose all meaning.

The following question is SHOULD the gap be bridged, as it is actually this gap that stimulate player behavioral pattern to progress the game?
The idea to bridge the gap just a little by providing Vanq at 40 is inconsistent, as we don't have any objective data that says that Vanq set is THE pivotal point in gear progression that enables any meaningful participation in RvR content. In different peoples' optics it as well could be Invader, Triumphant, Warlord, or Sov.

Good question. Whether the gap should be bridged is precisely what I’m trying to explore here, which is why I made this post. I agree that there's no definitive data suggesting Vanq is the "pivotal" point in gear progression, and I’m not claiming it is. However, my suggestion of Vanq at 40 is what I consider a balanced approach. It’s a natural progression that doesn’t drastically depart from the current system. It’s based on my game knowledge and experience, and -while anecdotal- I think it offers a fair middle ground.

Edit: It appears to be a widely held belief among the developers that Vanq is a pivotal point in progression, which is likely why it was selected as the minimum requirement for participating in ranked matches.

Personally I'd say that Conq is this point, and a hundred of other respondents will have a hundred of different opinions on the issue.

I beg to differ. I can see your point, but I’d argue Conq doesn’t quite meet the mark in terms of power.
That’s why I’m suggesting Vanq as a possible solution.
That said, I think there’s room for differing opinions here, and I'm open to more discussion on this.

This is an assumption that is not backed by any data, whereas the decrease in LT is a fact - you do suggest to take away a part, albeit not a big one but still significant, from player progression framework.

You’re right that there’s no hard data to prove that improving the early experience directly impacts retention. However, this is an educated assumption based on player feedback and common design principles. A smoother early progression tends to make games feel more accessible and less frustrating, which in turn can improve long-term retention. Sadly, I don't know what LT means.

[rychu007]

i agree with main suggestion in the topic but i also agree that lowering levels of renown will not solve second problem which amount of crests gained is.

In my opinion Gear shouldn't be locked behind two factors (renown and crests).

Two potential solutions for that:

1) adjusting set prices to allow players buy sets adequate to their current renown rank instead of tanking crests since level 1 till sov and farming wards via pve.

2) lock gear behind renown and adjust amount of renown gained (to not progress too fast) by all pvp activities. So once when U for example 58 renown u are able just go to vendor and buy all vanquisher level gear. When U reach 78 u go and buy def or off sov without any additional price. That change will also allow peolpe to be more flexible for grp plays and will not punish tries of testing non meta gear setups.