Recent Topics

Ads

Crossrealm

Chat about everything else - ask questions, share stories, or just hang out.
User avatar
Wam
Posts: 807

Re: Crossrealm

Post#71 » Fri Oct 05, 2018 9:16 am

Hargrim wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 5:07 am So what kind of incentives for underpopulated realm are you talking about Wam?

As for decent gear characters - well, my PoV is this is harder, because people doesn't really want decent, they just want BiS ASAP.
Well like i said this is tricky, because of the many variables at play... its hard to find a fine line which makes it worthwhile without being exploited. Thats why im glad its not my job to find carrot and stick aproach that works.

Increased renown % for underdog... already there, maybe more but it won't change too much for casuals as increased renown if your kills are low to zero from being so outnumbered is not really worth. So people swap sides to ride gravy train to make easy gains/character progression.

Then can't give combat bonus to underdog because organised would take full advantage of such things (also some map borders with pve land can step out and so its open to be abused a little), also especially as sometimes you might have more numbers in a zone on one side but they are afk on BO so buffing other side and realistically you are outnumbered then facing extra buff's... so thats pretty counter productive.

As for wanting BIS from get asap, yeah thats what people aim for but shouldn't expect it straight away without some work... its not that hard to farm in a team enviroment also.

Making a reward that veterans want, as well as fairweather casuals is also tricky... to do something which is not broken.

Also making some loot for fighting with AAO ... people could just stand around afk in zone with aao buff
so if its possible... make it kill/contribution linked?

Perhaps something cool cosmetic skin or dyes linked to number of rvr kills during % AAO would maybe entice some more people to try play underdog more and try close the gap in population shifts, but at the end of the day it depends on players priorities... some will want easy gains/bags/rr for boring gameplay and not care a damn about balance or any fancy skin.

The perception of x-realm is the everlasting problem of 2 faction system, when one side dominates too much, other side give up hope and concedes, where if there was 3 factions logically the 2 weaker would try double team the strongest so things balance out, instead of by domination/numbers/boredom route.

Maybe another thing, give incentive rewards shiny skins/mount/dyes to pug wb leaders who have played alot during AAO? to encourage more leaders

A possible cosmetic NPC if you have fought enough contribution with AAO during a zone capture ... maybe you earn 1 token per a zone? and need 30-100 tokens to buy something shiny from npc? Whatever seems suitable and non gamed system

I don't know the perfect solution from dev or player POV, just trying to think of a incentive that doesn't break gameplay/exploitable and enough of a carrot to make people think about sticking out being outnumbered and fighting hard to the last... instead of abandoning their realm in defeat and jumping on bandwagon... that would help go with your plans of limiting traffic flow in the wrong direction so the bigger force is less likely to keep getting bigger creating snowball effect.

in a Ideal world players wouldn't need incentive to go to underdog and would just do it for the challenge and action... but the world isn't ideal, thats why carrot and stick exists.

I would like to think that if casuals know they are making some character progression they might stick out being underdog/ or farmed and atleast try to fight back... nobody likes to lose but if they believe they are wasting their time with no character progression then I see why some of them join gravy train or give up. If they lose but still make character progression, if rewards have enough flavour to them ...

Then its like scenarios where majority of people stick out 500-0 for 1 medal for losing, instead of ragequit at portal because they are working towards something. But 1 conq medal in Orvr as a reward is not big enough pinata to entice people for their time, for gear they probably already have. Something like more unique tier of skins or mounts if possible in warhammer universe might just be appealing enough without breaking dynamics of game ?

But generally this small community is under magnify glass, makes things like this seem bigger than they are in a two faction system... unless you know for certain organised groups consistantly do it intentionally time and time again then that would be a issue but i doubt it's that bad, its more a bit of game rage look for excuse of failing...

x realm is the easy go to blame game to vent on nameless people. People naturally get tired/demotivated if fighting superior numbers or organised forces, they have work early or can get more fun investing time in something else so give up earlier or easier due to psychology of war and no hope/confidence in their current realm locking zone / or if the reward is worth the extra effort to push on.
Wamizzle Guild Leader [TUP]
Wamizzle Guild Leader [The Unlikely Plan]

Ads
User avatar
lefze
Suspended
Posts: 863

Re: Crossrealm

Post#72 » Fri Oct 05, 2018 9:43 am

Sulorie wrote: Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:43 am The common scenario is the following. Both sides equal in numbers, nobody is strong enough to take enemy keep but eventually after a few wipes at siege, being killed by a more coordinated force, one side loses players.
This is the time, when taking the enemy keep becomes a possibility.
When having fought for hours, changing to bigger side in this scenario is less likely. Most likely people call it a day and log off, because different time zones or they play other content than rvr to see some positive results for their playtime.
People will now blame xrealming for the population shift but in fact it is a natural imbalance caused by success and failure at rvr in combination with time zones and guild warband schedules.
Now one side might be heavily outnumbered and as a result the fights become very boring for the bigger faction, while it is possible to lock zone.
Apparently some people here prefer locks instead of fun fights.
This is exactly what I suspect is the truth in this case. Obviously no player has any real evidence to support any of the claims about crossrealming, but simply updating zonepop now and then shows people logging off is a much bigger issue than people switching sides most of the time.

Obviously there are people swapping sides to be on the winning side aswell, but this isn't a population wide thing.
Rip Phalanx

Aceboltz
Posts: 254

Re: Crossrealm

Post#73 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 5:42 am

What I am saying more precisely: if devs find a way to lock crossrealm it will result in a population drop, it's mathematic. But it will not stop the QQ! People having the mindset of putting their fails upon others will still find a way to complain about others.

Do you know what will happen if xrealm is not possible at all? Afk QQ. Yes, we will start to loose wars because of afk people. The same people that got demoralised after 3 wipes that may have logged on a toon on the other faction will just afk/log. Anti-xrealm people will just start asking for castrating anti-afk mesures the same way they want people be locked for 1/2/more hours (some even ask for days!!!) out of some of their characters.

Believe me, some people are already improving their afk QQ skills.

User avatar
Onemantankwall
Posts: 523

Re: Crossrealm

Post#74 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:05 am

Best way to fix xrealm and zone pops is reapplying the zone lock timers, these 12 hr zones are exhausting especially if you have 100%+ aao and the other side REFUSES to siege instead to bo hump in circles for 12 hrs, id say 4 hr zone campaigns most resources get flip BECAUSE (I've noticed from endlessly leading pug wbs) when a zone locks you lose members (it happens 99.9% of the time) thus shifting both zone pop aao and reduce the need to xrealm.
Lots of alts, more alts for the alt gods!

User avatar
Hargrim
Former Staff
Posts: 2465

Re: Crossrealm

Post#75 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:50 am

Onemantankwall wrote: Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:05 am Best way to fix xrealm and zone pops is reapplying the zone lock timers, these 12 hr zones are exhausting especially if you have 100%+ aao and the other side REFUSES to siege instead to bo hump in circles for 12 hrs, id say 4 hr zone campaigns most resources get flip BECAUSE (I've noticed from endlessly leading pug wbs) when a zone locks you lose members (it happens 99.9% of the time) thus shifting both zone pop aao and reduce the need to xrealm.

This is not coming back, because it's counterproductive when we release forts.
Image

User avatar
Onemantankwall
Posts: 523

Re: Crossrealm

Post#76 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:52 am

Hargrim wrote: Tue Oct 09, 2018 7:50 am
Onemantankwall wrote: Tue Oct 09, 2018 6:05 am Best way to fix xrealm and zone pops is reapplying the zone lock timers, these 12 hr zones are exhausting especially if you have 100%+ aao and the other side REFUSES to siege instead to bo hump in circles for 12 hrs, id say 4 hr zone campaigns most resources get flip BECAUSE (I've noticed from endlessly leading pug wbs) when a zone locks you lose members (it happens 99.9% of the time) thus shifting both zone pop aao and reduce the need to xrealm.

This is not coming back, because it's counterproductive when we release forts.
*drools* bring on the forts!!!

Think there needs to be a xrealm lock if your first character took part in pushing/being pushed to fort, to prevent defenders from xrealming to the zerg attacking said fort wasnt a issue with mutiple servers before but on one...
Lots of alts, more alts for the alt gods!

User avatar
Hargrim
Former Staff
Posts: 2465

Re: Crossrealm

Post#77 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:27 am

Onemantankwall wrote: Tue Oct 09, 2018 9:52 am *drools* bring on the forts!!!

Think there needs to be a xrealm lock if your first character took part in pushing/being pushed to fort, to prevent defenders from xrealming to the zerg attacking said fort wasnt a issue with mutiple servers before but on one...

Xrealm is other issue.

For forts we will manage what we need to do without it.
Image

User avatar
Onemantankwall
Posts: 523

Re: Crossrealm

Post#78 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:49 am

Was thinking the Quitter sc debuff is account wide what if you could do a temporary renown reduction debuff (lets say lasts 45mins) for logging off from lakes without flipping the zone ur in you can tack it on to how the contribution reset works when u bring amother toon into the same zone and ur previous contras wiped
Lots of alts, more alts for the alt gods!

Ads
User avatar
Hargrim
Former Staff
Posts: 2465

Re: Crossrealm

Post#79 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:57 am

Onemantankwall wrote: Tue Oct 09, 2018 10:49 am Was thinking the Quitter sc debuff is account wide what if you could do a temporary renown reduction debuff (lets say lasts 45mins) for logging off from lakes without flipping the zone ur in you can tack it on to how the contribution reset works when u bring amother toon into the same zone and ur previous contras wiped

Not needed and won't work because people can have 2 accounts. Wait for full xrealm solution when it is ready and released.
Image

Feru
Suspended
Posts: 89

Re: Crossrealm

Post#80 » Tue Oct 09, 2018 11:03 am

i don't see any difference between forts and t2, t3 or t4 castles, what i see is ppl saying that A or B player is bias because he is defending is faction/main toon.
"maybe" in beta we don't need to play in both factions and/to balance the classes :)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Amazon [Bot], anstalt and 10 guests