Patch Notes 31/1/2017

[RyanMakara]

You're right that this isn't a particularly demanding game, but might as well try to make the best of what we've got. I find the game plays far better on the 6v6 or 12v12 scales than it does on the 24v24 or 48v48 scales, so I'm aiming to split engagements into that.

But you already have that split! If someone like playing 6vs6 or 12vs12 there are scenarios for that.

If someone like to roam in 6 man party they can do it and you have introduced a mechanic (BO timers and resources) which makes it meaningful.

Open RvR lake is for a large scale combat and this what people (at least my friends) want. If we want a small scale we go roaming with AAO or go scenarios but open rvr lake aim is a large scale fight.

Meaning large scale I don't mean a mindless blob of 100+ people standing in one place but a proper tactical game with the WB trying to flank, go around and use CC for its advantage.

So you're saying that despite a 6 man's available objectives in oRvR, they cannot be a part of large scale WB versus WB fights? Roaming with AAO is only possible if there is a huge enemy force out in the lakes to pursue and challenge. It's the entire reason premades tend to be overwhelmingly better, as it relies on individual player skill and close quarter communication/co-operation between a select group of people. The goal is to go after bigger targets, and beat them through superior skill, rather than equal or more numbers.

However, when a 6 man group faces off against two warbands, they tend to lose after some amount of fighting. It's why some premade guilds make 2 party warbands; 2 balanced groups that work together, rather than 1 group already working together with its own party members. Same can be done for a full warband, although I doubt that 4 6 mans would team up in such a direct way.

[dur3al]

Odjira/QE

The solution to this problem is not to implement RNG passives that boost speed (causing major balance shifts), that don't stack with regular speed increases and that are available to every class in the game. No doubt someone will point out that changing AoE impacts small scale too - and yes, it does, but much, much less than Odjira and QE would, because of the nature of small scale. I internally suggested a tactic for MDPS to move more quickly in larger engagements and was shot down.

Make QE stack with regular speed increases then to not under-perform regular speed increases skills & existent procs. The point is the explanation I gave on "being-hit" factor, which won't really be that much of RNG - will be nearly permanent when facing larger numbers, that's what can give you an edge in oRvR when facing larger numbers then your group. And it won't be so one-sided & unbalanced such as what yourself have suggested to give something only to MDPS.

Small scale in oRvR rely only on hit-and-run tactics as I explained previously, in an open field battle without pugs & doors around the only way a 6 man will try to engage a 12 man + is if they're able to survive the engagement kiting, even if they don't succeed in killing anyone. Right now it is impossible without speed procs on-being-hit. Speed and kiting is a necessity, use terrain to your advantage, kite far and survive long to be able to spread out the blob - that's how you manage to fight against bigger numbers. Until you've realized this I'm afraid any other change to address this issue simply won't work - and the issue will remain.

In-fact if you push big guild groups to go ST instead of AoE (or hybrid as Haojin explained) you'll be effectively demolishing small scale in oRvR, I say this as a player who have played this game for years almost exclusively in 6 man's groups (for scenarios and for roaming), and the counter while fighting large bombing groups was because you could expect where their damage would be coming from - and you could effectively move around and kite it while trying to pick kills (with the use of speed and cc). But if the big group simply will focus ST damage on you, even if my healers spend everything to keep me alive by such focus and I instantly use CW and try to Flee+AP pot I will simply get snared again, and then ST nuked to hell in the next second since I'll still be within everyone's range, and especially now people will die so much easier without TB.

Definition of zerg: Any mass large enough to ruin the tactical and strategic depth of the game. The threshold for that happening, for me, is very low.

Beginning of the game there were massive zergs left and right of the map fighting each other. In-fact bombing was developed to counter the zergs. 24 mans were not a zerg as they are considered here in RoR, simply because back then we used to have 200+ enemies in one engagement. Bombing was a way to fight these odds. Most bombing guilds from my memory would limit themselves in one warband, or one warband and a group and roam together, I only recall on NA servers the guild called Ruin running 2-3 warbands together from the same guild. In Karak-Norn EU most bomb guilds would run 3 groups or a full warband at max. And due how bombing works (needs to get everyone in close range to be effective), smaller groups managed to keep a measure of challenge vs them through the use of speed procs as I detailed earlier. They would kite and lure enemy bombing warbands to bad positions opening themselves up for rear attacks, etc.

These changes are not really addressing the blob or zerg, but rather the bomb groups who to be fair, there are not many left in the server. And as I explained previously, you're potentially buffing them - a lot. Its not because most people are not able to pull it off that it doesn't work.

Don't get me wrong here, if large scale combat were actually good, interesting and deep, there would be no reason to look at it, but it's not. It's awful, it sidelines multiple classes and a significant number of abilities, it has very poor flow and massive downtime compared to uptime, it lags like hell when masses attack one another, it's full of imbalanced combats because of number issues, and that's probably why you don't see people flocking here to indulge in the pure awesome that is ORvR. The main defenses are from people who benefit heavily from the present situation (no surprise) and from casual players.

I agree with you that large engagements boil down to to a mindless laggy dps race which overlooks many skills, rotations etc. But I don't see how this change will address any of that. If you look closely to how the changes were made, basically its buffing bombing in order to fight zergs.

[peterthepan3]

To be fair, if warbands are now forced to rely more on ST, i.e. actually targeting opponents, assisting, proper rotations and not 1 key, then that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[Tamarlan]

For me, the game should resolve to groups as units, not warbands as units. MMO ability systems are small scale designs and go to **** in large scale.

This one is really interesting. So in your vision ORVR is around 6 mans roaming through the lakes. Warbands will be a relict of the past as your implementation roadmap is full of changes forcing players into groups in order to stay competetive.

Did I understand you correctly and is this common sense in your team?

[Tifereth]

I think you may be confusing my view here.

I get the aim and the thought process behind how you want to achieve it. Better gameplay overall would be a great thing in a general sense indeed. And of course you are right that small scale overall has the better use of the game mechanics right now, hence I prefer roam or scenarios myself. Although Warband v Warband is not as brainless as people trying to make it out to be. It has their own nuances that can make it interesting and it's not hard to see why people can love huge fights.

The crux of my comments was also not the numbers alone, but rather how even better use of skills or mechanics won't stop the big engagements at key positions from being an inevitable chaotic murderfest. Doesn't matter if AoE bombing, single target focus fire or 100 6 mans going at each other seperately; the game sends us in the same direction where people eventually get spammed to death. In the current environment, while you can change the way how we get there, the outcome will remain the same.

I'd wager neither Phalanx, nor Radiant Knights, Invasion or anybody really would oppose better gameplay for ORvR, and so far this thread made me confident. Underperforming classes, Moral Bomb Dominance etc can in my opinion all be adressed without forcing these guilds to fracture themselves.

[Komode]

To be fair, if warbands are now forced to rely more on ST, i.e. actually targeting opponents, assisting, proper rotations and not 1 key, then that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I really want to see how you will try to kill whole WB with ST assist. You know that people are abler to spam res, right?

[Azarael]

Small scale in oRvR rely only on hit-and-run tactics as I explained previously, in an open field battle without pugs & doors around the only way a 6 man will try to engage a 12 man + is if they're able to survive the engagement kiting, even if they don't succeed in killing anyone. Right now it is impossible without speed procs on-being-hit. Speed and kiting is a necessity, use terrain to your advantage, kite far and survive long to be able to spread out the blob - that's how you manage to fight against bigger numbers. Until you've realized this I'm afraid any other change to address this issue simply won't work - and the issue will remain.

There is something I don't get about the QE/Odjira argument, and it's this:

Odjira and QE are not some mythical game element that only 6 mans can use. Everyone in that 12 man or warband or whatever you may be facing can spec them as well. What factor makes QE and Odjira serve your purpose alone and not theirs?

This one is really interesting. So in your vision ORVR is around 6 mans roaming through the lakes. Warbands will be a relict of the past as your implementation roadmap is full of changes forcing players into groups in order to stay competetive.

Did I understand you correctly and is this common sense in your team?

Not exactly. The warband construct may serve a purpose for coordination, and I expect people will still form them and move in them. What I object to is that, upon reaching a combat situation, that combat situation plays as warband versus warband, with each representing a single unit. The aim should be around making each group in the warband something more of an autonomous unit, and offering some means of exploiting the ability to push people together into a shape that provides a disadvantage and gives your side an advantage. The aim was for a surround to be that shape, as it would be in classical warfare.

I don't speak for the opinions of the rest of the team.

[sabat80]

And how would you suppose that scenarios accommodate for larger strategy?

And how a small group of 6 or 12 can be accommodated for a larger strategy? They cannot take a keep (rightly so) and you have allowed tham to have a reason to exist in RvR with BO's and resources - great!

The ideal for RvR is to emulate a battlefront with squad mechanics being represented by groups. That's why RvR should be the main focus of the game - correctly done, it should resolve to something bigger and more interesting than scenarios.

Brilliant!, although a battlefront means concentration. This is how you break through a front: you find a weakens (or create a weakness with use of range) and you concentrate and push your armour through the gap.

Don't get me wrong here, if large scale combat were actually good, interesting and deep, there would be no reason to look at it, but it's not

And I agree that it needs to be looked at but what I would like not to see is to remove large scale (WB vs WB) due to game mechanics.

It's awful, it sidelines multiple classes and a significant number of abilities, it has very poor flow and massive downtime compared to uptime, it lags like hell when masses attack one another, it's full of imbalanced combats because of number issues,

Actually in our warbands we are using all classes (only exception is a WE which is usually in a scout party). Yes, some are better than others and this definitely should be looked at and addressed (and it is happening already).

and that's probably why you don't see people flocking here to indulge in the pure awesome that is ORvR. The main defenses are from people who benefit heavily from the present situation (no surprise) and from casual players.

I am not defending current system. I think that it is favouring defensive gameplay which makes the game boring therefore I am really looking forward to all changes that are done by you. And as we have seen in the past you are addressing people concerns and tweaking the system to make it better. To be honest it was getting slowly there in the past as we have seen more fights in the zone, more sieges from both sides.

I think what we need now is a move which will promote active game play instead of sitting in the keeps and waiting for a siege.

[dur3al]

To be fair, if warbands are now forced to rely more on ST, i.e. actually targeting opponents, assisting, proper rotations and not 1 key, then that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

If this happens, then only the zerg will win. As I explained before, the zerg is not necessarily the bombing warband, on live bombing was made as an anti-zerg setup (which was overperforming at the start, then got nerfed etc..). Sheer numbers will be the only factor deciding fights then.

[Penril]

To be fair, if warbands are now forced to rely more on ST, i.e. actually targeting opponents, assisting, proper rotations and not 1 key, then that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

I really want to see how you will try to kill whole WB with ST assist. You know that people are abler to spam res, right?

That's the beauty of it. The WB keeps rezzing, and the premade keeps farming them over and over and over and over. I have seen several premades do this a bazillion times.