Return of Reckoning

CountTalabecland wrote: ↑Thu Dec 06, 2018 2:24 am Order needs to roll more tanks and grp heals. Its been Order's main downfall since day one in PUG play, easy as that. Hard to balance around people dead set on being imbalanced. Maybe making new Order tank/healer aesthetics (now that devs can do that) will help since apparently appearance is the reason no one wants to play them.

Wrong thread mate, (on topic) What if you reworked how flip loot works? Instead of bag on flip give it on keep take after a lord drops, thus promoting more zone play/keep takes atm its fight in one zone 12 hrs log off log back on phat loot waiting in mail for you bring keeps back into the equation with the new gear release itll def cause zone splitting because u cant afk on a bo for loot anymore

Hey Yaliskah.

Ive thrown around a lot of ideas for RvR in the past. I eventually gave up, lol.


I think these are the main things why we play WAR that are currently missing.
Think T1. Many of us just like to skirmish. Zerging fest for hours. In T2, Morr BO in TC.
Just fighting over some centralized place. Many of us just love to do that.

To make this work BOs and zones have to lock and be open based on the population size.
Even in T1 you start to see problems. Currently 2 zones can be open at the same time no matter what the population is.. So each realm tends to sit on dead BOs in dead zones.
This goes back to forcing players to fight.. You have to force them to fight somewhere more.

T2/4. Amount of players.
0 - 55 players = 1 BO open.
56 - 75 players = 2 BOs open.
76 - 95 players = 3 BOs open.
96 - 110 players = 4 BOs open.
111+ players An additional T24 zone opens for capture.
1 additional BO opens in new zone every +20 players from 111, plus additional zone unlocks and BOs.

T1. Amount of players
0 - 15 players. 1 BO open.
16 - 30 players. 2 BOs open.
31 - 45 players. 3 BOs open.
46 - 55. 4 BOs open.
56+ ,additional zone opens for capture + 1 BO.
1 additional BO open in new zone for every +15 players past 56, plus additional zone unlocks and BOs.


BOs locking would work the sameway controlled BOs work now(like door repair, lord strength,teleporting, dropping off resources, ect, ect).
Once all BOs in the zone become locked, after 5minutes they all reset.
Locking a BO would give 25 points of resource. (100 points is 1 star rank) (Brings back 5star lock)
Returning resource to a locked BO 5points.
BOs resources dont deplete over time.

The whole concept of BOs locking is to allow fighting to take place around the board.
And to move to different areas on the map.
How BOs lock can be very very simple, but it can also be very very complex.
The simplest is to stand next to BO for 2minutes, if no enemy is within xxx yards of BO, BO will lock after 2 minutes. If enemy is within xxx yards of BO, the 2minute lock time will pause. Potentially dragging out a BO lock a lot longer than 2 minutes.


Here is my thread breaking down how it would work. Its very long and probably too confusing to understand.
viewtopic.php?f=15&t=27415&p=310475#p310475

I also remember when BOs were changed to their current format. I would love to see some kind of simple BO locking system. Players need to be forced into areas to fight.
BOs are the answer, each BO should be like a little keep siege, so many rules could be added to BOs. They could be transformed in so many ways to the contribution of a zone.

Collateral wrote: ↑Mon Nov 26, 2018 3:01 pm Remove keep lord, put a flag that takes 5 mins to cap instead.

Yes lord is another problem. Lord should be AI that protects his room from being captured. Lord gains greater stun, knockback abilities based on defending keep rank.
Maybe he could do minor damage, but he wouldnt be something you attack.
You capture keep, just like a giant BO. Maybe it would have an outer area flag and an inner.


The game has become a BO sitting, pvp avoiding, pve game. Trying to disperse the zerg, nothing wrong with it. BO trading shouldnt happen, running to BOs when keep is under siege and having to hold BOs. All of this takes away from PvP.
The current system takes away from pvp, it doesnt add to it.

If BOs locked, yes it would force the attacking realm to get BOs. It would also allow the defending realm to eventually defend their keep, because they wouldnt have to sit on the BO, it would lock.
During peak hours when the game has 3 wbs on both sides, you dont see these problems as much. When there is only 1wb or half a wb for each side, these problems become huge issues.
For anyone saying 1BO open with 200aao.. Well, then learn to get some kills and work together, aao fighting is the best. If you are down 200aao. Yes the other side should win, it shouldnt drag out into this avoidance, sit on BOs situation.

In general it comes from the mentality that players don't want to spread out, either because they don't feel it being rewarding enough in terms of semi afk BO ticks / build contribution in two zones at once, or because there is little to no action in the "off zone" when several zones are active.

Many of us could come up with ideas how to improve rewards or give tools for the playerbase mentality to spread out, but I personally fear the damage is already done with too much BO hugging implimented and the casual mindset is too deep overall on RoR and players don't want to get involved in guilds/allianced and work for realmwide pushes because there have not yet been a need for this behaviour with no city sieges as commongoal.

That being said, a few tweaks can be made to prevent the action in a singlezone and spread it out more;
"Had any player actually been propper excited over killing the keeplord" will be my opening thourght. I could be wrong, but I guess the answere is no.
You can make the Lord really exciting with amazing AI, abilties and whatnot. But it seems to fall flat. Instead I present an idea around 3 floor BO capturing zones in a keeptake. Just like when the keeplord in current system has been defeated and you need to hold the lordroom free of enemy players. Add this system to all 3 floors, roof, lordroom and bottom floor and slap it on a X min timer for the captureing realm to hold all 3 points free of Steathers, wardbands funneling roof as laststand or reinforcements breaking poster or maindoor.

After a keep is taken succesfully the locking realm will need ALL BOs plus the keeps, Yeah this will give the outnumbered realm a chance to setup a funnel in a far away BO, allow for ninjacapping and realmwide zone coordination between hitting north and south to stretch out numbers. Sure it might create additional lag when everyone is focusing on a far south BO but the system should still give insentive to spread out and hold several BOs and/or attack several BOs instead of full force in one place. In theory.

Some players are loot and personal progression driven, some players are out there seaking action in form of kills. Find a common reward system that rewards both, right now it seems like killing is neither important enough in terms of rewards (make kills matter more!) or incentified for new or casual players to get involved and improve their chance of killing more.

I have had many showerthourght ideas of systems to fix much of the above but all of them stim down to Cross realm being enabled and "spies" can feed Victory points/resources by intentionally feeding kills etc. And I persoanlly think this needs more of a lockdown timer for any improvement systems to function.

Raggaz wrote: ↑Thu Dec 06, 2018 4:34 am
The game has become a BO sitting, pvp avoiding, pve game.

I agree with the sentiments of avoidance but I see it as a product of population imbalance (within 1 zone), the hopelessness situation. Hope for more good ideas that can help the situation in times when players start logging off. I will fight with AAO up to around 80-100% at a keep defense with hopes that by holding on a bit longer more troops will come to zone to provide support, and ultimately lower the AAO% to under 40%. If a keep siege AAO remains over 40% there is basically 0% chance of accomplishing anything other than getting stomped on. Might get 1 or 2 kills or some exceptional circumstances might change the flow of battle, but chances are low that might happen.

BO hasn't become a sitting game. That is up to players to decide what they want to do. If they want to sit then I say let them. I am one of these 'casuals' types. Often reading or doing other work or surfing web while half playing RoR. That's my choice. It's not because I don't want to play it's just that I can't commit 100% to what a roaming warband requires one to commit to. Also sitting there waiting for a scenario to pop.

There has always been a big misconception by X group of players who think that because they see players sitting around - be it at BO, Keep or WC, that they ought to be rolling with them instead - being more useful in their warband. Thing is that isn't the way it works with those types of players. They don't want to roll with one big group or play with Y groups warband. It might seem like the right thing from some players view points, that they should all work together but that is not what sandbox PvP is about? or isn't it?

I am a little late to the party but it took me some time to think out my comments and suggestions on this.

There is no perfect solution to zone population issues since people go to and play in zones for many different reasons.

Guild warbands, and 6 man groups will go to where the action is, and will often times swap zones to spread population around.

But no one really enjoys keep sieges at the moment. The lords feel more like a time sink than anything else, and no organized WB really wants to sit semi afk on a lord for 10-15 minutes as you grind it down. You want to be out and about fighting or on the first floor where the enemy players are.

If a zone gets super zergy you might consider swapping zones, but that presents it's own problems since you are going to an empty zone, to knock on an empty keep. No actions, no real excitement, so many of your WB players get bored and lose focus. You also get no end of flak from your realm as a whole if you peel off a keep take or defense to go to an empty zone. So while guilds do it when they have to, it is not something people really want to do.

The addition of new sets has really made this even harder. Winning or losing people, don't want to leave zones for fear of bag and contribution loss. Getting a few medals in a zergy laggy zone is better for many than getting none in an empty zone.

But I don't think there is a fix for this. Since if rewards in empty zones were better we would just end up with people trading keeps again. The current system while flawed is better than many of the alternatives.

My main suggestion would be to make keeps less of a drag. Change cap mechanic to a lock timer system. 10 min lock after flag cap. Have keep lords be connect to keep rank and spawn in at 3 stars. This would turn the majority of keep fights on their head and create a slightly more enjoyable experience, and lock timers can also be adjusted up or down to find a sweet spot if needed, as could keep supply gain for faster or slower 3's. Right now it is rare to see 3 or above in a keep defense or siege and 5 star locks haven't happened in months. So some tweaks there could give more options.

A last a final idea would be for zone wipe renown buffs. If the dev's see that praag is zerged into the ground with 10 WBs, but BV is open and empty. Activate and announce a call to action for BV and boost the RR gain in that zone by 25-30%. That would easily provide incentive for people to pop over and split the pop, or encourage logging players to move to BV instead.

Would it be possible to create a cap in the zone for player balance? I.e. 100 destro allows a max of same amount of order +/- 15%, the exceeding numbers will simply be not flagged in the rvr lake. At the same time keeping open another "secondary" zone with a MINIMAL renown bonus gain to allure players.
Priority to people already in a warband or group, since splitting them will decrease appeal for organised guilds. A sort of "booking system", I.e. Nazgul has a 12 men wb ready, if the half (6) reaches the lake, they "book"6 slots for the other members on their way.
Secondary zones rolls should contain appealing goodies (cosmetics, pots, tallies, dyes).

hoy there !! even we don't answer, we are reading this post carrefully.

Some ideas could be interesting, some other would ask lot of rework, and some imo -excuse me, with all respect- are missing important counterparts.

Whatever you can propose start with this question : " How can i break my brilliant idea? What is the limit of this solution (In which way can't it work properly)? If you are unable to answer these 2 questions, you probably have something . And then, comes the technical part :p.

Solutions are all good , problems coming with aren't :p.

To make people split up more you have to reward being in the "off zones" and not just the currently hot zone. As it is now the BO ticks are tiny, so no one goes there for the ticks. And with no one going there, there's no one to fight except in the main zone.

So a simple solution would be to increase BO ticks, at least for low pop zones. Perhaps double or triple them as long as there's 6 or fewer players on it.

That would cause some people to "AFK" at BOs, but then there would also be people to fight, and those AFKers would most likely be killed by small scale roaming parties.

I think a simple change like that would promote more small scale action in the off zones and draw some people out of the main zone.