mynban wrote: ↑Mon Aug 30, 2021 3:48 am Current state of RvR is quite boring, player behavior runs on a simple algorithm of 'avoiding equal/bigger fights and chasing (zerging) smaller enemy groups'. And the reason is simple; it is more rewarding to do so. Game does not reward sieging and winning a keep with equal AAO, any more than zerging it with bigger numbers leading to 60% AAO. Players literally refuse to attempt a siege unless enemy is outnumbered. And current AAO rr bonus system is failing to incentivize fights for underdog either, because all it leads to is 6mans farming solo runners and strays; instead of actually facing equal or bigger groups.
There are plans for spreading the battle to map, supposedly for promoting for more even fights; but it is not hard to see how that will simply make having bigger numbers even more advantageous, leading to even more zerging behaviour. For any change to have a positive impact game needs to address two things;
- Incentivize players who will face a one-sided outnumbered battle to actually join the fight
With that in mind here is my suggestion;
- In terms of rewards, make it more appealing to chase equal/bigger fights rather than zerging
- Active zones accumulate rewards (medallions/shards/bags/bonus rr etc.) based on kills(*). Accumulation is also amplified based on AAO; zerging side gets smaller addition, underdog side gets bigger
- Once zone is locked, total accumulated rewards are distributed to players based on their contribution
All of that idea is based on concept of 'what kind of player behavior that mechanics would lead to?'. It would lead to;
- Player contribution (for getting accumulated rewards) is significantly reduced for kills via outnumbering battles, and it is significantly increased for kills fighting bigger groups.
- People running along zerg would feel more incentivized to run with a well organized but smaller group instead.
- Underpopulated side would want to take on and fight bigger number zerging enemies
- AAO now translates into better accumulated rewards (that is distributed among fewer people as well), and is a real incentive to join a one-sided fight.
People can still stick with zerg to get zone lock rewards; but there is now the choice to go fight for a zone where your side is not outnumbering to benefit more from accumulating rewards. All of the idea is about how to steer player behavior towards desired competitive direction, based on how rewards system works.
- People wont choose quick zone flips over ones where there is proper resistance (in current system reward is same for both, so people see it as waste of time for same reward)
GMs keep removing/nerfing abilities, mechanics, items and rr benefits that give classes group synergy, which normally makes the whole greater than the sum of its parts. In DAOC an 8 man team could easily beat 20 disorganized players, but not in this game. Why? Numbers win in Warhammer. In Warhammer a 6-man group used to be able to defeat 15 players with lots of effort, then that was reduced to 12, then 10, now maybe 8. GMs keep removing class synergies and making classes vanilla until all seem equal. Previously, one of the greatest duo teams in the game: DPS DOK and TANK. This duo could face 6 or 8 disorganized order and actually win. What did GMs do? They nerfed DPS DOK so hard the synergy with the tank was diminished to maybe allow the DPS DOK/tank combo to kill 4 disorganized opponents. And this process keeps playing out. It's making all classes vanilla with few class synergies, and frankly boring. Then rr was diminished making it easy to hit top rr benefits, basically giving free rr to all players. I could make a toon and in 2 months have 95% the strength of character created 4 years ago. They just want a super friendly game to casuals with very little class synergy.