New RvR system vs Old RvR system Poll

[Azarael]

Losing side loads their opposite side chars.

The problem is not the system, the problem is that the path of least resistance is switching sides to roll with the zerg, thus contributing to the problem.

[OldPlayer]

Losing side loads their opposite side chars.

The problem is not the system, the problem is that the path of least resistance is switching sides to roll with the zerg, thus contributing to the problem.

During the original system both sides were playing their respective characters. Now, much more often than before there is only one side playing RvR.
New system has tunnelled RvR into just one zone at a time, therefore path of least resistance advices to "ok, I relog to the winning side, no sense of wasting my time here". And I think we both agree that most people will choose the path of least resistance.

[Tiggo]

then no system in the world will fix that. if people dont want to play the game, they should just stop playing it.

i cant understand that whole thinking ... what do people think they achieve with cheating the system? all they get is MORE OF THE SAME. it makes no sense to me sorry.

[noisestorm]

Imo we could open up both zones again and keep the current system. locked zones should return to neutral after 30 min, after that the 15 min custom lock timer or the keeps start to apply (maybe reduce it to 10 min if the zones are locked in the first place). this with my already (in other topic) mentioned Aao* changes could supress keep trading, but offer enough zerg counterplay and alternatives for actions.

(*Aao giving reduced captimers,as well as extended locktimers for BOs for the underdog)

[OldPlayer]

then no system in the world will fix that. if people dont want to play the game, they should just stop playing it.

People want to play the game they want to play. You cannot change that. Those who like your game, will play it. Those who do not, will stop playing it.
If you change the game the way you want, some people will like it, some won't.
If you provide original mechanics and then change them, some people will approve, some won't.

But most of all these people will always choose the path of least resistance.

With respect to all different opinions.

[Tiggo]

so you say most people will cheat in any game? i cant believe that sorry.

the whole warhammer game is based on the conflict of order against chaos/destruction. changing side on a "least resistance" premisse is just totally dumb and stupid. (in my mind i chose order or chaos and then STICK to it. Or at least after i chose one side for the day i stick to that. changing sides every hour or so is just destroying once own game experience and i just cant understand thy people do that at all, it makes no sense.)

[Bozzax]

After playing a bit I'd say one faction do zerg PvE chain locking zones while the other side guard mailbox and queue SCs.

/sad panda

[Vilhelmina]

Can we at least flip the zones on server restarts so that Empire is locked and we can go fight on Dorflands for a change?

More like 'Return of Groundhog Day' at the moment.

[Luth]

Imo we could open up both zones again and keep the current system. locked zones should return to neutral after 30 min, after that the 15 min custom lock timer or the keeps start to apply (maybe reduce it to 10 min if the zones are locked in the first place). this with my already (in other topic) mentioned Aao* changes could supress keep trading, but offer enough zerg counterplay and alternatives for actions.

(*Aao giving reduced captimers,as well as extended locktimers for BOs for the underdog)

Thief.

[threxx]

Imo we could open up both zones again and keep the current system. locked zones should return to neutral after 30 min, after that the 15 min custom lock timer or the keeps start to apply (maybe reduce it to 10 min if the zones are locked in the first place). this with my already (in other topic) mentioned Aao* changes could supress keep trading, but offer enough zerg counterplay and alternatives for actions.

(*Aao giving reduced captimers,as well as extended locktimers for BOs for the underdog)

Couldn't agree more with your post.

In my opinion having only one contested zone is the biggest flaw of the current system. It gives the bigger Zerg an almost impossible advantage and the underpopulated Realm has almost no possibility to lock a zone.

On live Server ( with 3 Zones per Tier ) you had at least the option to spread the zerg by attacking keeps in other zones. That leads to plenty of options on how you want to play the game.
- Zerglings can zerg.
- Small Scale parties can split from zerg and go defend other zones ( loved the fights on these zones with my party of 2-6 people ).
- The smaller Zerg can have its glorious 5 minutes because they can lock zones as well and get their precious rewards
- and so on...

And at the end of the day everybody can join a big fight because 2 zones are locked and only one contested remains for a short period of time.After that it all starts from the beginning and everyone can choose on how they want to play.

I don't think the population is an argument for only one contested zone at the moment because it was way worse on live in t2 zones ( at Carroburg at least ). The population will become an issue as soon we hit T3 though.

Like i said above thats only my own opinion and everybody is entitled to their own.