Eras - doors were open, nonstop guards spam (thanks Uthgard staff for reviewing this), level 10 it seemed, 1,280 rps. Probably 40 or so guards killed including one purple commander, besides Lord. We were one group, all got same RPs.

Eras - unclaimed. 1 group, 450 rps.

Guard respawn was not reviewed yet. We'll take care of it.

Blue wrote:Guard respawn was not reviewed yet. We'll take care of it.

Thank you. Guard spam can be really brutal on some of these keeps - I can't remember how it was, but they're seriously no joke here. I've been in a few groups where it seems like it was bugged and they just keep re spawning way before they should, irregardless of which guards were alive or dead.

One thing that I didnt think of before, if RP for keep takes are dependant on number of people attacking, doesnt that again entice players to exclude any undesired or excess player lfg from the raid? This way the most benefit will go to high RR regular groups again.
If you are low RR casual, go with 3 groups and receive ~100 RP for 30min running and raiding, the whole feature is kinda useless.

Point being: number of attacker should not go into the equation.

Blue wrote:Guard respawn was not reviewed yet. We'll take care of it.

Cool, does this include BG Keeps too?

Doubled.

Tree wrote:One thing that I didnt think of before, if RP for keep takes are dependant on number of people attacking, doesnt that again entice players to exclude any undesired or excess player lfg from the raid? This way the most benefit will go to high RR regular groups again.
If you are low RR casual, go with 3 groups and receive ~100 RP for 30min running and raiding, the whole feature is kinda useless.

Point being: number of attacker should not go into the equation.

A keep gives an RP pool depending on the level of the doors and the guards. The pool is divided by the number of attackers inside the keep when the Lord is killed. So, a high keep taken down by few attackers = lots of RPs / attacker. If each player got the same RPs no matter how many attackers everyone would zerg the keeps. It's a risk vs reward thing.

Ah the rps are really divided amongst attackers? I remember it different, ofc it doesnt have to be as it was in former times.... adding guard spawn in the equation does have a possibility of exploit though and should be evaluated carefully

Guard kills are not contributing to the RPs gained when raiding a keep.
Guard respawn will be checked in the future.

Gil wrote:A keep gives an RP pool depending on the level of the doors and the guards. The pool is divided by the number of attackers inside the keep when the Lord is killed. So, a high keep taken down by few attackers = lots of RPs / attacker. If each player got the same RPs no matter how many attackers everyone would zerg the keeps. It's a risk vs reward thing.

I understand the reasoning behind that and its absolutely sound. However it defeats purpose.
RP for keeps was a feature request specifically to enable casual players to find RvR groups and do something meaningful and rewarding.
If the reward however works in a way that grants more benefit to small, professional high RR parties the casual is again left out.

I understand that the opposite will be keep raiding zergs, but why is that a problem? More people in frontier, more small groups moving around, trying to catch up, more RP to intercept by high RR groups, more accessibility, more fun for everyone.
If keep RP are meant to help casuals get some RP, the way it is now, most casuals will just be left in the border keeps, because why gimp the raiding RP reward by dragging their useless sorry asses along?

Tree wrote:

Gil wrote:A keep gives an RP pool depending on the level of the doors and the guards. The pool is divided by the number of attackers inside the keep when the Lord is killed. So, a high keep taken down by few attackers = lots of RPs / attacker. If each player got the same RPs no matter how many attackers everyone would zerg the keeps. It's a risk vs reward thing.

I understand the reasoning behind that and its absolutely sound. However it defeats purpose.
RP for keeps was a feature request specifically to enable casual players to find RvR groups and do something meaningful and rewarding.
If the reward however works in a way that grants more benefit to small, professional high RR parties the casual is again left out.

I understand that the opposite will be keep raiding zergs, but why is that a problem? More people in frontier, more small groups moving around, trying to catch up, more RP to intercept by high RR groups, more accessibility, more fun for everyone.
If keep RP are meant to help casuals get some RP, the way it is now, most casuals will just be left in the border keeps, because why gimp the raiding RP reward by dragging their useless sorry asses along?

It is a tricky situation. While i agree more RPs for casuals is good because it gets people to the frontiers, better play should see better compensation. Otherwise it's just a numbers game of mindless zergs running around keep trading empty keeps getting tons of RPs. That's the last thing i want.

The better players/groups should be rewarded for their better play.

There shouldbe a minimum rps set for keep based on player's level. For 50 maybe 500 + bonus of contribution. For 40 maybe 250 + bonus of contribution and so on.

The RPs a keep is worth are based on the keeps level and its gate levels, devided by the amount of attackers raiding the keep. We are currently discussing how successfully defending a keep should and could be rewarded.

yesterday:
1. Beno - guard spawn nonstop, we had about 2 fg, one group was level 40s mostly. Outside door 1 was high level, inside door was lower level. Our group (we had few 40s) got 500 RPs.
2. Surs - doors were about same as Beno, we had bit more people for Surs, I believe, again non stop guard spawn - we got about 450 RPs
3. Eras - non claimed keep, low level doors, had about 2 1/2 groups with us. My group got 250 or so RPs.

as I've mentioned in the earlier post - giving some base RPs as minimum depending on level + bonus for contribution would probably be a good idea. guard spam...yes, I know you guys are looking at it. ty.