Changelog 4th June, 2016

[Azarael]

But it's frankly impossible to do that.

Anything a small force does on the battlefield can be crushed by a zerg unless the tools are given to those small forces to repel zergs, in which case you're STILL going to get the case in which a pure zerg isn't going to be the be all and end all of the game. The point is, as soon as that damn zerg stops being THE dominant method of RvR, you lose that segment of the playerbase, so you're buggered. You can cater to the masses or you can go screw yourself.

[CzarRedwall]

No idea where you guys are taking us, but expect even the people who disagree with you to hang on for the ride. Keep up the good work!

[Mael]

Ok, ok. It's clear how heavily intellectually invested you are in this, which is laudable, but also slightly dangerous

The main point I was trying to make though is that even the best of plans doesn't always, for whatever reasons, end up being a popular success. At the end of the day it's always a numbers game, and a server based on mass warfare without numbers isn't going to work. I honestly hope that this does all work out well with the masses, as it sounds interesting.

All I was trying to say is that it's always a good idea to make a backup/backup plan, just in case the masses don't end up wanting to play it. Easier to do a partial wipe/restore than a complete recode (just in case). Apologies if this appears obvious.

[bloodi]

But it's frankly impossible to do that.

Anything a small force does on the battlefield can be crushed by a zerg unless the tools are given to those small forces to repel zergs, in which case you're STILL going to get the case in which a pure zerg isn't going to be the be all and end all of the game. The point is, as soon as that damn zerg stops being THE dominant method of RvR, you lose that segment of the playerbase, so you're buggered. You can cater to the masses or you can go screw yourself.

I lost you here, so you rather lose everyone? Because if we lose the masses, Orvr dies.

If the only way to implement your system is to left the average joe out, i would say its a big mistake, you can see Orvr lately, zergs may not be great but hell, they are much better than empty orvr with no action.

And i dont think its that impossible, with the old system we had zergs and we had plenty of 6 man groups roaming around, true that they have very few things to do when it comes to a keep siege but you can also say that keep sieges are a matter of big numbers, no one would argue that you want a place for 6 mans in fortress sieges wouldnt you say so?

Incentivize orvr outside keeps while leaving the keeps to said zergs with maybe new objectives or special bos or something like that.

Overall the point is that, we need lots of people playing in Orvr in as much zones as possible, does your new system really make an incentive for that?

[Azarael]

This is why I originally didn't want to reveal anything before any kind of system was playable - because I'm left having to defend hypotheticals without any gameplay experience or results to point to.

Fact is, no one really knows how this will end up or how people will react and adapt to it. Not you, not me. It's pointless for me to continue in light of that.

[Grobbok]

If the only way to implement your system is to left the average joe out, i would say its a big mistake, you can see Orvr lately, zergs may not be great but hell, they are much better than empty orvr with no action.

100% agree
a pity that instead restore us to our favourite game, someone wants to create something new, something poor

[bloodi]

This is why I originally didn't want to reveal anything before any kind of system was playable - because I'm left having to defend hypotheticals without any gameplay experience or results to point to.

Fact is, no one really knows how this will end up or how people will react and adapt to it. Not you, not me. It's pointless for me to continue in light of that.

And this is why we originally wanted you to reveal it, so we were able to discuss what problems it may have before its implemented.

Yeah, no one knows the future, we can however argue based on the past and the present and we can argue based on how it went for other games.

Overall, would you say the latest changes related to Bos, the removal of medallions for kills quest in orvr, removing medallions from keep captures outside loot bags, were good for orvr?

[magicthighs]

100% agree
a pity that instead restore us to our favourite game, someone wants to create something new, something poor

Because huge blobs of players locking empty zones while carefully avoiding the enemy so they can get their gear without actually doing any real work for it is such a great mechanism.

[bloodi]

Because huge blobs of players locking empty zones while carefully avoiding the enemy so they can get their gear without actually doing any real work for it is such a great mechanism.

But in t3 if you attacked an empty keep you got no medallions or gear.

So that was not possible.

[Azarael]

None of those changes have any relation to future RvR at all. The current system is a stopgap based on the T3 system. The only change that was made (and reverted) based on future RvR was the artillery.

And as I'm sure you know from other games, we can theorycraft about something until the cows come home. You won't even be close to how the real implementation will play. Nor will I, as I admitted in my "seven/eight iterations" post. Seen it far too many times when designing weapons which were designed to deal with some particular gameplay flaw, and worrying if they were overdone, only to realize that people are far more adaptable than you give them credit for and will find ways to mitigate the impact.

What do I expect with future RvR? I expect that most of the time, a zerg won't even get hit by artillery unless it's totally braindead, because smaller groups will break off and stop heavy weapons from even reaching the front. It's true that those weapons are designed in such a manner that they will crush mass infantry, but that is mostly there so that smaller groups have to do something else that will actually protect their zerg. Can a zerg still represent a major thrust of an offensive? Absolutely. If an enemy loses all their siege weapons or is outmanoeuvred, the engagement still resolves to numbers winning. Should a zerg basically be immortal on the battlefield? No.