Invader/Warlord/Sov Token System

[Aurandilaz]

invader being bad for a large number of classes is another thing, it starts feeling like forced Gunbad ward grind, except 50 times worse. Because at least you get out of Gunbad after 3 runs, doing 50 forts to get 220 invader takes 2-5 months
Some classes use invader 2-3 set just to max mainstat/wounds etc. Afaik SL/chop are one of the few classes that run full set, the 5-6-7pc bonuses for various other classes are just various shades of meh if not outright loss of dmg when compared to stacking 2-3pc bonuses from other sets. Which is okay, since apparently Sov is also designed in ways where most classes stack just 2-3-4 bonuses. Except you still need the ward, even if not using rest of the set.
Forts suck as melee, and the few classes without aoe basically just throw their corpses into a 5ft wide postern watching as the BWs keep piling Rain of Fire everywhere melting enemies while gathering their 2nd or 3rd sets for the lols. As melee, you can basically sit in a corner with a thumb up your own ass and cultivate while waiting for the ranged aoe classes to finish either melting attackers or the defenders.

[StrongUn]

1 Invader medallion can be downgradeable to 5 vanquisher medals

Why not make Royal Crest downgradeable to Invader Medallions? Invader is not BiS gear anymore.

[M0rw47h]

1 Invader medallion can be downgradeable to 5 vanquisher medals

Why not make Royal Crest downgradeable to Invader Medallions? Invader is not BiS gear anymore.

...because...

Fort currency is acquired from forts so people continue to have a reason to play, and get into, Forts. When fort currency is commonly available elsewhere, like from City siege, we get the example someone gave here already where they refuse to even play their character unless a city is available, because it allows them to not care about Forts and skip them.

Conversion of currency between Invader and Royal is the same problem from a different direction, which is why it's also not being done.

Skipping content is not intended, and I'll bring this up for next patch. Thanks for pointing it out as a problem. We certainly don't want players to feel like they need to park their characters for any reason.

Constructive feedback about forts would be how to make them fun/interesting to play despite the reward structure. If it's such a **** experience you would literally give up playing your sub-RR70 characters because you can skip it for maybe getting into a city siege twice a day, then that seems like we have room for improvement. The goal from the beginning was to make engaging content that players enjoy. Rewards are quite secondary to that.

Regarding tokens from kills, the cost structure simply isn't tuned for this. It is specifically tuned for content completion. If you could receive Royal or Invader crests on-kill, then the prices would need to be much much much higher, on the scale of how high Vanquisher is. It would also destroy any need to move the RvR campaign, as groups of players would simply farm kills for currency rather than complete any objective, which would be a massive step back for us.

Upconversion from Vanq to Invader has a couple problems. First, people have TONS of leftover Vanq from the year or so prior to forts where they just played RvR as the end game for fun. Even with a conversion rate of 100 to 1, several players would simply be able to skip Forts entirely. Second, like the previous point, players would have another avenue to simply farm kills and ignore the RvR campaign even with a really bad conversion rate, to eventually get the Invader they need to progress through the ward system.

Upconversion from Invader to Royal would simply run a much less impactful issue of players taking spots in limited fort battles for a minimal gain in potential Royal medals. We don't typically see a lot of clamoring for that example, but figured I would cover it.

That should cover this set of suggestions. See you guys in the next thread for this same exact problem.

In short - devs want us to participate in forts as part of RvR campaign. If you dislike forts, make suggestions to improve them.

[StrongUn]

Maybe 1 Royal Crest > 5 Invader Medals is too much?

1 Royal Crest > 2 Invader Medals or even 1:1

People would countinue participating on forts, just makes getting invader set a bit faster

[M0rw47h]

Maybe 1 Royal Crest > 5 Invader Medals is too much?

1 Royal Crest > 2 Invader Medals or even 1:1

People would countinue participating on forts, just makes getting invader set a bit faster

If you read wargrimnir post, even 1:1 won't happen.
Attackers get 6 invaders per fort if they win or 4 if they lose, defenders get 4 invaders and extra royal if they win. I'd say average city gives you 12 royals, thus you could skip forts completly.

[nat3s]

1 Invader medallion can be downgradeable to 5 vanquisher medals

Why not make Royal Crest downgradeable to Invader Medallions? Invader is not BiS gear anymore.

...because...

Fort currency is acquired from forts so people continue to have a reason to play, and get into, Forts. When fort currency is commonly available elsewhere, like from City siege, we get the example someone gave here already where they refuse to even play their character unless a city is available, because it allows them to not care about Forts and skip them.

Conversion of currency between Invader and Royal is the same problem from a different direction, which is why it's also not being done.

Skipping content is not intended, and I'll bring this up for next patch. Thanks for pointing it out as a problem. We certainly don't want players to feel like they need to park their characters for any reason.

Constructive feedback about forts would be how to make them fun/interesting to play despite the reward structure. If it's such a **** experience you would literally give up playing your sub-RR70 characters because you can skip it for maybe getting into a city siege twice a day, then that seems like we have room for improvement. The goal from the beginning was to make engaging content that players enjoy. Rewards are quite secondary to that.

Regarding tokens from kills, the cost structure simply isn't tuned for this. It is specifically tuned for content completion. If you could receive Royal or Invader crests on-kill, then the prices would need to be much much much higher, on the scale of how high Vanquisher is. It would also destroy any need to move the RvR campaign, as groups of players would simply farm kills for currency rather than complete any objective, which would be a massive step back for us.

Upconversion from Vanq to Invader has a couple problems. First, people have TONS of leftover Vanq from the year or so prior to forts where they just played RvR as the end game for fun. Even with a conversion rate of 100 to 1, several players would simply be able to skip Forts entirely. Second, like the previous point, players would have another avenue to simply farm kills and ignore the RvR campaign even with a really bad conversion rate, to eventually get the Invader they need to progress through the ward system.

Upconversion from Invader to Royal would simply run a much less impactful issue of players taking spots in limited fort battles for a minimal gain in potential Royal medals. We don't typically see a lot of clamoring for that example, but figured I would cover it.

That should cover this set of suggestions. See you guys in the next thread for this same exact problem.

In short - devs want us to participate in forts as part of RvR campaign. If you dislike forts, make suggestions to improve them.

Disagree. In short - devs want us to participate in forts and players want to participate in forts, but with the high pop, people cant actually participate in forts - at least not as much as they can city sieges, hecne the problem

[M0rw47h]

Disagree. In short - devs want us to participate in forts and players want to participate in forts, but with the high pop, people cant actually participate in forts - at least not as much as they can city sieges, hecne the problem

My suggestion on how to solve this problem.

[nat3s]

Disagree. In short - devs want us to participate in forts and players want to participate in forts, but with the high pop, people cant actually participate in forts - at least not as much as they can city sieges, hecne the problem

My suggestion on how to solve this problem.

Fully agree with that, good idea.

[Demonthyr]

One of the problems is -as a returning high rr player, i will prob have 1 if not 2 full sov sets before i can have invader.
By the time i got it, i will just equip it once for ToK unlock and put it in a stash, therefore "skipping" invader set completely. Invader is a good progression set, shame its a such spot.

As you and other already said in this topic i have more difficulty to have invader tokens than a friend that is below rr 70 and i feel penalized because of my rr.

It's a lot of pain as a tank to have bag in forts (only 1 since the forts are implemented and i did a lot..) so at least to be able to choose in city bag royal or invader token can be helpfull and just more fair to everyone.

Still enjoying a lot the game but perhaps this little change about choice in bag is needed to stop to penalize players that come back or are too high rr to have invader like other more modest rr do.

Anyway this has to be taken as a suggestion, thanks to the ROR team for all they do.

[Omegus]

In short - devs want us to participate in forts as part of RvR campaign. If you dislike forts, make suggestions to improve them.

Except this is nonsense as RR40-RR69 can skip forts entirely and earn Invader tokens direct from the city.