X-Realm Lockout - Potential Solution

[Delerium69]

I'm surprised that this hasn't had more love (thanks for those that have commented).

[storm]

Bump +1

[Aethilmar]

I'm surprised that this hasn't had more love (thanks for those that have commented).

Having to necro your own thread should tell you something.

I'm still not sure exactly what you hope to do with this proposal. Which "xrealm" problem are you trying to solve?

There are multiple distinct populations that may try to swap over. I'm not even going to pretend this is a complete list but here are some:

1. Those who switch from getting beaten side to strong side b/c they want to win (or maybe just don't want to lose)
2. Those who switch from zerg side to aao side b/c they want to farm (e.g. fort swapping)
3. Those who switch from zerg side to aao side b/c they want to balance.
4. Those who switch from zerg side to aao side b/c they want aao.
5. Those who switch because they want to play their other characters.

It feels like your suggestion is squarely aimed at population #1 and #2 and you don't care about punishing populations #3, #4, and #5 with the assumption that population #3 at least won't mind b/c they are altruistic.

And, fundamentally, you haven't laid out what core problem you are trying to solve with this. "Everyone" says that xrealming is bad but they all have different definitions of "xrealming" and "bad".

This is a complicated problem (like most human behavior) and you should be very specific about what you are targeting and why and what the costs will be.

[Delerium69]

Having to necro your own thread should tell you something.

Thanks for the passive aggressive start to your post. If I overlook that, my point is that the lockout serves no real purpose in its current form. Players just want to play, regardless of side. The solution that i give even allows players to move to a winning side if thats what they want to do but they won't benefit from it or accumulate contribution until their lockout timer has passed.

[OstianKing]

i might just stick to one side at this rate

[Blorke]

Make it happen.

[Aethilmar]

Having to necro your own thread should tell you something.

Thanks for the passive aggressive start to your post. If I overlook that, my point is that the lockout serves no real purpose in its current form. Players just want to play, regardless of side. The solution that i give even allows players to move to a winning side if thats what they want to do but they won't benefit from it or accumulate contribution until their lockout timer has passed.

I only do aggressive aggressive.

As for the current solution, it clearly does serve a purpose. It slows down flip-flopping. It also can be (and is) gamed.

So what xrealm "problem" are you trying to solve from my list or of your own choosing? You keep saying you will allow players to switch but you haven't defined which undesirable behavior you are trying to address bearing in mind that every other solution is going to have undesired side effects. You can't do a reasonable cost-benefit analysis without knowing which benefit you are hoping to gain from this solution. As previously noted, people cannot even agree on what the definition of xrealm is.

For example, the most benign x-realm example I can think of still gets some folks get really bent out of shape when the guild leading their side with high Apathy swaps sides in the middle of the lakes (not talking fort farming here) to the AAO side. But that is supposedly a behavior to be lauded not despised. Why would you not want to reward a group/WB for making things "more even"?

[Stinksuit]

From what Ive heard some of the wb leads say is that there are times when they would want to swap sides to balance but they might have people with lock outs and ultimately that then prevents them from swapping because they would have to leave people behind. With this "solution" they could swap over and only few of them wouldn't get rewards from orvr due to the theoretical lock out timer still running for them.

I guess the solution is good for stuff like this with pve aswell, maybe you have guild group on destro and feel like its enough rvr for the day and would like to run some pve on order but one of you have locks so you just dont do the pve then all together and log out instead.

To me OPs proposal in here kinda works for those who actually dont really care for the rewards but rather just would like to have fights and join the underdog and then doesnt work for those who seek just easy rewards and swaps to the winning side.

[tromat]

This is simply a GREAT idea. We had so much primetime ruined by impossibilty to swap and help weaker side, its a big reason of why Cross and LNM stopped.

Devs please !

[Delerium69]

From what Ive heard some of the wb leads say is that there are times when they would want to swap sides to balance but they might have people with lock outs and ultimately that then prevents them from swapping because they would have to leave people behind. With this "solution" they could swap over and only few of them wouldn't get rewards from orvr due to the theoretical lock out timer still running for them.

Absolutely this! There have been countless times I have formed a warband and 15 minutes later the zone has been heavily stacked on the side im on (not because of me!) so the desire to switch is there but, as people play both sides regularly during non-wb times, their lockouts kick in and we're frustrated that half of the warband cant actually switch over to the other side to balance.