Return of Reckoning

dkabib wrote: IMO keep SCs contribution OUT.
I only enjoy ORvR, and would hate to need SCs contributing.

So of the original WAR, PvE PQs are out, PvP scenarios are out. What will remain, zerging?

OldPlayer wrote:

dkabib wrote: IMO keep SCs contribution OUT.
I only enjoy ORvR, and would hate to need SCs contributing.

So of the original WAR, PvE PQs are out, PvP scenarios are out. What will remain, zerging?

You want to go do SCs, go do it...
You wanna do some PvE, wrong game...?

Zerging? No thanks.

dkabib wrote:

OldPlayer wrote:

dkabib wrote: IMO keep SCs contribution OUT.
I only enjoy ORvR, and would hate to need SCs contributing.

So of the original WAR, PvE PQs are out, PvP scenarios are out. What will remain, zerging?

You want to go do SCs, go do it...
You wanna do some PvE, wrong game...?

Zerging? No thanks.

I am afraid I've played different WAR. We had groups making PQs, groups pwning scenarios, groups taking care of BOs and warbands storming keeps, everyone ensuing zone locks.
And considering PQs it was changing everyday, cause most people wanted to patrol RvR zone, therefore it was based on calendar.

Current version of RvR is not about zerging? May I join your server?

OldPlayer wrote:

dkabib wrote: IMO keep SCs contribution OUT.
I only enjoy ORvR, and would hate to need SCs contributing.

So of the original WAR, PvE PQs are out, PvP scenarios are out. What will remain, zerging?

How about you actually read the suggestion, before making assumptions?

And i dont see rewards for loser side (rp medal)... because fight during 1 hour lose the lake and get anything ? So peeps are gonna to do same things like now.

Fighting and win its always fun
Fighting and lose isn't fun
Fighting and lose again isn't fun
Fighting and lose again isn't fun !!!!!!!! O **** win nothing for all our effort it's boring i stop Orvr.

Why destro and order (sometimes) stop to do Orvr t2 because they are zerged and they win nothing for keep them motivated to def other lake.

Blorckever wrote:And i dont see rewards for loser side (rp medal)... because fight during 1 hour lose the lake and get anything ? So peeps are gonna to do same things like now.

Fighting and win its always fun
Fighting and lose isn't fun
Fighting and lose again isn't fun
Fighting and lose again isn't fun !!!!!!!! O **** win nothing for all our effort it's boring i stop Orvr.

Why destro and order (sometimes) stop to do Orvr t2 because they are zerged and they win nothing for keep them motivated to def other lake.

AAO would also fix this. If you lose repeatedly with a AAO system implemented, it is in fact your own fault then. You are playing badly (As a faction).

But having said that, I'm not a fan of losers getting nothing, because it's never your own fault (as a single individual) that you lost. Therefore it makes no sense that you should be punished for it. Rewards should however be bigger for the winner by a large margin. Something like 3:1.

Razid1987 wrote:

OldPlayer wrote:

dkabib wrote: IMO keep SCs contribution OUT.
I only enjoy ORvR, and would hate to need SCs contributing.

So of the original WAR, PvE PQs are out, PvP scenarios are out. What will remain, zerging?

How about you actually read the suggestion, before making assumptions?

Do not make assumptions so fast, dear friend. My response was to dkabib, not to OP.

Razid1987 wrote:

Blorckever wrote:And i dont see rewards for loser side (rp medal)... because fight during 1 hour lose the lake and get anything ? So peeps are gonna to do same things like now.

Fighting and win its always fun
Fighting and lose isn't fun
Fighting and lose again isn't fun
Fighting and lose again isn't fun !!!!!!!! O **** win nothing for all our effort it's boring i stop Orvr.

Why destro and order (sometimes) stop to do Orvr t2 because they are zerged and they win nothing for keep them motivated to def other lake.

AAO would also fix this. If you lose repeatedly with a AAO system implemented, it is in fact your own fault then. You are playing badly (As a faction).

But having said that, I'm not a fan of losers getting nothing, because it's never your own fault (as a single individual) that you lost. Therefore it makes no sense that you should be punished for it. Rewards should however be bigger for the winner by a large margin. Something like 3:1.

Sure sure just peeps on RvR lake and peeps on loser side can be rewarded for all effort adn agree to whit reward margin

1 medal for looser 5 for winner / or exemple 1200 rp for winner 400 or 600 for loser whit this add content loser side can see their chars forward a bit ...

I always found that the attractive part of war was cooperative play, and I like a system that poses challenges to players requiring cooperation. By this I do not mean forcing players to join a WB, but rather requiring a variety of tasks to be completed simultaneously to lock a zone: Taking keep, holding objectives, winning scenarios... Not all has or can be done by the same players, but everyone should have a role to play in locking the zone. In the early days of WAR, the lower tiers zones counted for lock also, so that players in the higher zones would be "encouraging" lower tiers players to secure objectives. I remember cheering for the premades going into scenarios be ause we needed their victory to lock. Artificially locking objectives and creating a linear zone locking path is promoting zerging: The mass go from BO 1 to BO 2 to keep without concern because the BOs are lock for 15 min... what's the point of that artificial lock: If players want/need to hold them, let them post guards!

skutrug wrote:I always found that the attractive part of war was cooperative play, and I like a system that poses challenges to players requiring cooperation. By this I do not mean forcing players to join a WB, but rather requiring a variety of tasks to be completed simultaneously to lock a zone: Taking keep, holding objectives, winning scenarios... Not all has or can be done by the same players, but everyone should have a role to play in locking the zone. In the early days of WAR, the lower tiers zones counted for lock also, so that players in the higher zones would be "encouraging" lower tiers players to secure objectives. I remember cheering for the premades going into scenarios be ause we needed their victory to lock. Artificially locking objectives and creating a linear zone locking path is promoting zerging: The mass go from BO 1 to BO 2 to keep without concern because the BOs are lock for 15 min... what's the point of that artificial lock: If players want/need to hold them, let them post guards!

That's a really fine idea (Except for the SC part), but there's just one problem: The same 4 classes excel at all those tasks, because... AoE!

The 4 classes are of course: Knight/Chosen, BW/Sorc, Slayer/Chopper, and WP/DoK.

They take keeps the best, defend them best, hold BOs best, take BOs best, and win SCs best. Just get a group going with 2 of each role and you're golden.

Also, the problem with the lower tiers counting was in the early days that people logged OFF thier Rank 40 mains, and onto alts to flip zones. It destroyed the activity in the T4 zones. I don't want that to happen here, too.

There is no artificial lock in the suggestion. You should reread it.