RVR new system feedback

[mourne]

First of all, thanks to Devs for getting War up and running - love this game to bits.

Secondly, boo to you for falling into exactly the same issue as the original WAR went into.

As soon as you take open RVR out of the game, the population numbers go down and the server dies. Bombing wbs and KOTbs did it on the original WAR, new RVR system is gonna do the same here. Let me explain what will happen:

I have 60mins to play. Options are endless-tons of games around. I am already getting some kills in T1. Sometimes you get rolled, sometimes you roll, nevertheless you have fun, I have fun, we dance around BO. I can spend 60 mins and have fun. Or even 30. That was yesterday, when I was in T1. Helluva fun time.

T2. New RVR system. Open WB goes up, ppl gather, and capture BO. NO Order in play. Keep? Nah, got to get supplies. Get the supplies. Ram is bugged, towing through tunnels is bugged, takes ages. Keep rank drops. Ok, I go and lug supplies. First run - get 300rr reward, cool. Second run-30rr reward. Uh oh. Third run - 10rr reward. You kidding me? Chaps at the keep still cant get the ram up. Order turns with ninja WH who disrupt the supply lines. WB stretches to cover, but ram is still not up (lvl 10 guild required for ram and all), and so the siege dies. 60mins spent, kills 0, about 350rr gained. FUN? Non-existent.

Question - how inclined would I be to spend another 60mins to rvr in T2? Or level my char to 40, only to know that I would have to endure same slag there, on top of cannons, engi los issues, and rest?

Dunno. WAR has always been a place to grab some kills in oRVR. Slowing this aspect of a game down, and putting extra @strategy@ on top is not going to add more people to server. If I wanted strategy, Il go and play EVE.

The only tier where the game feels alive now is T1. Please add a way to stop EXP gain in T1 so I can just oRVR there.

[saupreusse]

So what is your suggestion? You sound like it should be an easy task to rebuild a fully working server. Fixing all the bugs? Hell yeah we are on it! Warhammer used to have different systems with different lvls of strategy. The system we have right now is pretty much a spiced up copy from patch 1.4.8. also i fail to understand why everytime there is a patch people cry. Dont you understand that we are actually listening to you? When you say a system is crap then well try to improve it. But keep in mind that we have to test things, otherwise we cant know if they work or not. You sound like you have the masterplan to make a good rvr, then would you be so kind and enlighten us?

[roadkillrobin]

First of all, thanks for making it clear to me. And while you are right when you said its all about the coordination, we got to consider if this system isnt breaking the games flow too much. I now see why its there and it sure does sound like a good thing on paper, but in reality it doesnt quite do what its supposed to do because of these unwanted byeffects like random getting stuck or bodyblocked when it really isnt your fault. I felt pretty much the same about cannon knockback. It sounded good but it wasnt fun to play, and thats what a game is all about in the end.

There was a couple of collition modifications made to the live game, I remember there was a poll on the live servers if players wanted friendly collition completly removed from the gane and it got voted down quit heaivly with the reason that it will make people stack on top of eachother and making it impossible to single out specific players. It also removes any strategic use of oposing friendly bodyblocking meaning the side with more numbers can basicly stack up even more peeople in the same area and removing any kinda advantage the smaller force have. I remembeer Sacrx made a long long argument why we need friendly collition in the game. So if you can get a hold him or any other Red Guard members remembing this you can prob get more detailed explanation about it. They did however make some alteration to it were you basicly had to attack or heal someone thats been attacked or attacking someone to get collition. It wasn't tied to being in combat tho It was basicly a different check that faded much faster then the in combat check does. So if you stop being attacked, healing or attacking someone you would stop generating collition within something like 3 seconds. And this makes the game flow much better as you're not consistantly bumpin into people that causes collition who doesn't do anything other then just standing around. I belive the current system just check if there's hostile players within X range and if there are all players within that area gets collition until their out of combat,

[Azarael]

Collision is handled by the client. Whatever system is in use is Age of Reckoning - period.

[mourne]

I am not sure if I get your tone right, and I apologize if you feel unrewarded for the hard work you put in, but this is a feedback thread. I don't know it all, I am just telling you with reasoning how I am spending 60 mins of my time. (hint! - debolstering to T1).

With the current population you have to keep the chopping going. As simple as this. WAR is a RVR game. Currently people are waiting long for scenarios, and I doubt any change other than growing population would improve this. No bug fix can attract 10k new players. But oRVR is alive, and its not broken. It ain't need fixing.

Id say:
1. Make keep door breakable by the zerg. Ya, I know, this is what you have tried to sort out. But zerg would still be there. Hitting the door for 28 damage from a ballista is not my cup of tea. Doubt it is yours either. Even when WAR was full, stuff like ram or oil would go down too quick and everyone still banged the door. I doubt that ppl are so concerned about it here.

2. Streamline and quicken the oRVR. Roll back to the old system - keep doors breakable, remove supplies, etc. It is a great idea - just not workable at current population levels. If there is 15man wb vs 10man wb in T2, do you think that many would run the supply train or tow the ram? A simple "cap all bo's to siege the keep" rule is fine.

3. Contrary to focusing all action on one zone (with the inevitable zerg issues and hence trying to solve zerg issues with siege weapons), why not spread the action across all three zones? Increase rewards for capping BOs if zone is empty of any opposition. If BO is captured, the whole faction gets a 10rr (test it to see what would be acceptable) tick every minute. Keep the 5 min to lock the BO. Remove zone lock altogether. Successful siege give a faction-wide one-off RR gain.

Aim: to push a new wave of people into the front every minute. Make BO's important via faction-wide RR gain. Spread the action across all zones, as you can't simply roll a wb and lock one zone after the other using the timer system.

Summary:
1. Improve the oRVR system to attract more people into the war zone to allow quick pick-up open WBs to get some kills and increased - either at BOs, keeps, whatever.
2. The only bug worth mentioning is dwarf los.

[roadkillrobin]

This is from a FAQ 8 years ago.

Spoiler:

This is what is in the FAQ(I believe Slayer said it was quoted from Wiki)

"Warhammer Online will feature collision detection, but only against enemy targets. This means a player will be able to "walk through" friendly players and NPCs but will be unable to walk through enemy targets (this is to prevent possible abuse of the system). Currently, Mythic is testing collision detection with a variety of alternate implementations. One of these possible implementations allows enemy players to slowly "push through" one another, as if walking in quicksand. This will help encourage the use of tanks in PvP, as they will be able to hold choke points and protect weaker players."

http://www.gamefaqs.com/boards/520538-w ... g/43722609

Here's a video that shows how they handled it early on.

Spoiler:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MtpSyhDgjYs

[Azarael]

spiel from t2 perspective

Please stop blaming the RvR system for T2 playercount issues. I don't even care about the RvR system in T2/T3 right now, we have other plans to resolve the problems in lower tiers. If you don't have a T4 perspective, your feedback is of no use to me right now, and if you think I'm going to do a rollback because you're complaining about performance in 24v24 situations, then you're off your rocker, sorry.

No, I will not allow people to play in other zones, because what happens then? An entire realm changes zone to force the other realm to relocate and regain advantage, adding to fight downtime and reducing the gains made from hard fights on a battlefront. Zone switching is only ever used abusively to duck fights. Other games don't let you force a map switch when you're losing, you fight on that map until someone wins, and this one will be no different. Hence I will continue to refine mechanics in one zone. It's been six days. Stop calling for rollbacks based on six days of play, because you won't change my path by doing so, not one bit. You will only make me angry by demonstrating ignorance at best and impatience at worst with how development and design work.

And no, please do not reply with a post complaining about how I'm not paying attention to T2. I won't even read it. And don't even bother rolling up a post complaining about me stating that I won't read your posts about T2. I won't bother with that either. Stick to the T4 perspective or don't bother posting.

[dur3al]

spiel from t2 perspective

Please stop blaming the RvR system for T2 playercount issues. I don't even care about the RvR system in T2/T3 right now, we have other plans to resolve the problems in lower tiers. If you don't have a T4 perspective, your feedback is of no use to me right now, and if you think I'm going to do a rollback because you're complaining about performance in 24v24 situations, then you're off your rocker, sorry.

No, I will not allow people to play in other zones, because what happens then? An entire realm changes zone to force the other realm to relocate and regain advantage, adding to fight downtime and reducing the gains made from hard fights on a battlefront. Zone switching is only ever used abusively to duck fights. Other games don't let you force a map switch when you're losing, you fight on that map until someone wins, and this one will be no different. Hence I will continue to refine mechanics in one zone. It's been six days. Stop calling for rollbacks based on six days of play, because you won't change my path by doing so, not one bit. You will only make me angry by demonstrating ignorance at best and impatience at worst with how development and design work.

And no, please do not reply with a post complaining about how I'm not paying attention to T2. I won't even read it. And don't even bother rolling up a post complaining about me stating that I won't read your posts about T2. I won't bother with that either. Stick to the T4 perspective or don't bother posting.

I don't know if you read my suggestion for oRvR earlier in this thread, but as long as the fights resolve to much around keeps you'll always run into the very same problems I think

[megadeath]

No, I will not allow people to play in other zones, because what happens then? An entire realm changes zone to force the other realm to relocate and regain advantage, adding to fight downtime and reducing the gains made

Exactly. It's called maneuvers. What is there to gain when you headbang keep door for 4 hours and go to sleep without taking it?

Zone switching is only ever used abusively to duck fights.

It's used to stretch out enemy defences and cancel state of stalemate.

Other games don't let you force a map switch when you're losing, you fight on that map until someone wins

Exactly, until someone wins. With current system you are forcing a stalemate until one of the sides gets 100% aao.

It's been six days. Stop calling for rollbacks based on six days of play

Those six days were enough for me to lose all incentive to play, sadly.

[saupreusse]

there have been patches nearly every day. Just give AZ some time.