CONCEPT: Major RvR Overhaul

[Nameless]

So what. Let them lock, there always be advantages for over populated realm but instead of creating lagfest at only important boject at the lake spread them around the BOs.
By your logic if one of the realms got 100 ppl into the lake and other 25. To cover all BOs overpopulated realm will put let say 25 ppl per BO, that way underpopulated side will got equal fight at one BO. Yea they may lost that fight, and prolly other side will lock but who care the most important thing is the fair fight not the carrot at the end of the stick.

We agree on splitting the zerg via BO control, that's a start.
Taking the situation you mention it works out like this.

400% aao means the underdog needs to hold the BO for 30 sec, then it is save for 15 min and might generate points for a possible secondary win condition at a increased rate. BO of the zerging side take 3 min to cap and are never save and generate point at a reduced rate.

The underdog has the choice to pick any BO and fight against equal numbers or they just pick the BO with the least defenders.
Wiping all defenders gives an attack reward, when all are dead. Same goes for defenders, when they are successful.
When the underdog BO unlocks, strong npc guards are spawned. Attacking underdog BOs with a bigger force to overcome player and npc defenders leaves other BOs with less protection.

well i dont like much lock timers, via them, for certain time, we have less important objectives on the map. May be scaling on NPC guards power based on AAO will be god idea. Althought this will be hard to balance cos 400 AAO when u got 2 of one realm and 8 of other and 400 AAO with 100 vs 400 are whole different thigs.

Aditional disadvantage on your system is happaning when underpopulated realm take BO and it got locked for 15 min then the zerg could concentate only at other 3 BOs. If second BO is taken then there is less spots to be, which means more zergs at limited spots inside the lakes. Lock times limit usage of objectives, so i dont like them. When you dont spare some ppl to defend your key map objective then you deserve to lose it

[Sulorie]

Let's say the underdog has 400% aao, then the single BO you own generates more points than the three other BO controlled by the zerg. Now the 2nd win condition kicks in and pushes the zerg to attack the keep, because they would lose the zone by points.

Keep in mind, the underdog has no spare ppl to guard BO, when having high aao. Timers are the only way to secure them for a certain time.

[Nameless]

why ppl are so concentrate on locking zones. It is not so important to give the underdog a way to lock the zone but instead just fair fight. Locking zone gives what? renown, medalions, inf? All that can be provided by AAO, but fair fight not. Noone really care which realm lock the zone

[Sulorie]

Why we gather points in sc? To determine who has won.
A lock is a sign of accomplishment for your realm, you won the battle in this zone and move to the next.

A lock triggers the opening of another zone, because only up to 2 will be active at a time.

The 2nd lock option solves stalemates, which happened a lot on live, where people just left the zone to take other undefended and prepared zones.
Furthermore the zerg is forced to actively go for the keep instead of hiding, to offer more skirmish options for the underdog.

[Nameless]

zone lock =\= win. Zone lock, fort takes, king kill were measure for winning long, long time ago. Now ppl just want rp, inf and medalions. Only the outcome of the fight matters. Give to the ppl more equal numbered, non zergy fights, where they could use even st groups and ppl will be happy cos noone care who lock the zone if they could got more inf, rp, medalions from fighting at the zone
with the other points i agree

[Tesq]

sulorie how this system will deal in zone where more flags are near each other like TM?

zerg would simply push those zones, and as downside the other zones would be flag with aao for the outnumbered realm making those zone very long to lock for them.
Also making zerg in zone like tm able to controll easily most of the flags without spread.

Do you think the outnumbered realm has to leave a zone like TM?
One BO is far off, most likely owned by the underdog. The zerg has to cover the ram carrier, pulling defenders away from BOs towards the keep for the siege. Whenever you attack something, you only have to hold it for half a minute. Fights usually don't last that long.
A zerg is not the best coordinated entity and we see it every day in game, reaction times are not that fast.
Different BO could give different points per tick as well. There are enough numbers to toy around.

i don't want insist but in a zone like that is so easy do all of that togheter, even giving 3 flags lesser points ticks you would just give too many advantage to the underdogs or slower the whole process so much that ppl would not play this rvr or even worst reroll one faction doing sc as the lock get faster.
Also this do tno solve the whole problem we have atm

What if the zerg is totally one side? that's the huge problem.

[Sulorie]

i don't want insist but in a zone like that is so easy do all of that togheter, even giving 3 flags lesser points ticks you would just give too many advantage to the underdogs or slower the whole process so much that ppl would not play this rvr or even worst reroll one faction doing sc as the lock get faster.
Also this do tno solve the whole problem we have atm

What if the zerg is totally one side? that's the huge problem.

The underdog has the advantage, when the zerging side does not go for the keep to lock the zone. They would only win in the long run. There has to be a notable advantage and people have to recognize it, that switching to the bigger side doesn't make progress easier and faster, like it currently is.

"What if the zerg is totally one side?"
Then it takes very long to gather the required points to be able to start a siege. No enemies to kill and not being able to start a siege to earn easy pvek rewards, when no enemies are in the zone, gives a clear message.
Those one-sides zergs don't happen naturally. They only exist, when the reward system is flawed, favoring the bigger side.

[boog]

This is out of ignorance, please keep in mind.

Does the losing realm get a pity tick or a light reward as the system is currently? I was playing order but got sick of the Zerg so made a destro and well it takes forever for zones to lock and when they have I always seem to miss the action or be in a scenario.

In the event the losing realm does not get any reward for a zone being locked I offer this simple solution albeit temporary.

Just give the losing realm a reward for the zone locking equal to half that of the winning realm.

This is by no means a permanent fix to the issue but a simple way of appeasing the victims of zerging, regardless of realm. It will allow both factions to progress and not feel they need to switch factions in order to progress.

After this bandaid has been applied a more temporary resolution can be created.

Of course if this idea is already implemented and I've just had horrible timing in missing pity ticks, this response is obviously pointless. Please inform me though if I am incorrect.

Cheers

[Sulorie]

Why fight back, when you get a passive reward for losing?
You should get increased rewards for resistance and no incentive to switch realms to the bigger side.

Pity ticks don't exist here.

[boog]

I mean that's neat but doesn't answer my question as well as jumping to the conclusion that this is the proposed fix to the issue (which if you read my post you would see that is not what I said). Also in case u don't remember WAR live had pity ticks for losing realm.

As Order on Badlands that was toppled by Destro frequently the pity ticks were a welcome reward for at least trying and not making it feel like an hour + had been wasted.

I don't deny what you said about increased incentive. However, I believe the idea of AAO and its implementation have been thrown around so much on this thread it didn't need rememtioning.