CONCEPT: Major RvR Overhaul

[Sulorie]

a carrier is a hostile player? no pve there?

oh i understand now: on live that wasnt a player carrying an orb or something but a npc?

then you are right, i would change that.

my idea: players can pick up orbs at one warcamp of the contested zone and carry it to the other warcamp of the contested zone and thus help their realm lock it. Please no dumb npcs in rvr ^^

Yes, on live we had npc carriers between BO and WC.

What I don't understand is about which 2 warcamps you are talking. Or do you meant carrying the goods from BO to your WC?
This would be an interesting thought.
Nevertheless it is important that this is only an additional way of locking, not the fastest or more common way. Otherwise keep sieges become a side note.

[Tiggo]

from bo to warcamp is a good idea too. what i thought for example: run from the wc in marshes of madness to the warcamp in barack varr. (no flying, no scaven).



balancing can be done via the vp points an orb gives when delivered.

[Bozzax]

Personally I never liked rams or VP-locks.

Rams are waithammer and collecting VPs (waiting) normally favours the stronger side. In the end you win by waiting.

I much rather have this http://i.imgur.com/tEVeRDd.png

[Tiggo]

vp system is ok if its dynamic and you have total transparency about vp status (how much vp from what source etc.) then its not boring.

on live it was intransparent like hell, noone actuall knew why or why not a zone locked, that resulted in to waithammer.

a direct "take all, win all" i prefer too.

[Sulorie]

from bo to warcamp is a good idea too. what i thought for example: run from the wc in marshes of madness to the warcamp in barack varr. (no flying, no scaven).



balancing can be done via the vp points an orb gives when delivered.

Only the dwarf t2-3 zones have the tunnels and 2 wc.
Could we think of a different name than VP?
It reminds me of something bad in the past.


______________________________________

Rams are no waithammer, when all have something to do. There won't be a zerg standing at keep doors bored to death as they have to split their forces and actively secure BOs.
If ramhammer was so boring, how ppl were wiped by defenders, when there is nothing to do?
Only leechers stand at keeps doing nothing.

[Bozzax]

@Tiggo
Never liked the "don't queue up unless you are premade calls" (of VP scenarios)

I prefer the "domination" lock style simply as the zerg has to split on 6 locations which opens up for guerrilla warfare. I remember when we lit up north BO and hit south (playing cat and mouse with enemies). Best part if they zerg is lazy they get no lock.

In most VP systems the numerically stronger side normally get a lock regardless if you take a BO or two. They just gain more VPs from being/controlling more.

[Sulorie]

With domination you mean holding all BO + keeps for a certain time to lock a zone?

If yes, why shouldn't all players switch to the bigger side to guarantee a lock?

[Soulcheg]

If yes, why shouldn't all players switch to the bigger side to guarantee a lock?

Well, because 1 good group can delay zone's lock till the end of the time, constantly burning BO's, upsetting lock's timer.

[Sulorie]

If yes, why shouldn't all players switch to the bigger side to guarantee a lock?

Well, because 1 good group can delay zone's lock till the end of the time, constantly burning BO's, upsetting lock's timer.

A system has to work in any situation. You can't balance it on a premade vs pug basis.
Both sides have equal skill but different numbers, this is the scenario we should and I talk about.
How to bust the zerg in smaller chunks, which are manageable by the underdog.
Without pulling more players towards the bigger side.

[Bozzax]

With domination you mean holding all BO + keeps for a certain time to lock a zone?

If yes, why shouldn't all players switch to the bigger side to guarantee a lock?

You actually point out key selling point and the biggest difference to an accumulating VP system

The Zerg quite often gave up as an well organised smaller forces could deny the lock. Other times the attacker managed to organise enough and earn it.