the main problem is that the staff is on a crusade to make this server like it was back in the days. many good improvements done after release will just be ignored because it doesnt match patch 1.65-1.80.

mythic made some horrible mistakes TOA, CL's, ML's, buffbots, multi account drivers etc. those mistakes are mostly bad decissions but not realy programcoding relevant things. in my view the staff on uthgard is doing mistakes if they continue to go back to 1.65 and canceling all the good things mythic improved the game. at same time they allow custom like things like tajendi. what i am missing is a shedule to what point they wanna go to... maybe they have one but do not spread it to the community, but to me it looks like they dont have a shedule.

on the other side we need to understand that those projects are extremly time intensive for the staff and coders.

Astealoth wrote:and how would my suggestion complicate things? ^^

I mean: doing just what you said back there won't solve the problem entirely. It might even make things worse since you would remove things without really compensating them.

Anyway I've done this explanation before...

im not suggesting removing anything. im suggesting fix the areas that have NF keeps to being useful. as they are they are completely useless and unreliable, you have to roll a new toon every 2 weeks if u wanna play in them, completely senseless.

catania wrote:the main problem is that the staff is on a crusade to make this server like it was back in the days. many good improvements done after release will just be ignored because it doesnt match patch 1.65-1.80.

sure but they've made a decision to have battlegrounds. i say remove them or make them more useful than they are. as it is the bgs are just a tease. fake battlegrounds do not help this server, real battlegrounds or no battlegrounds are the only logical solutions.

Well for one keep guards are a joke. the archer range is way short. not anough of them and they dont pop fast anough.

You can easly take a keep with 3 people. It not fun to defend at all because the keep provides little help inless you have the same numbers as the attackers.

In the real OF i could hold off a fg as a hunter, now they just laugh and beat down the doors with bare hands if they wanted to.

Give reasions to defend, there has to be RPs in it or none will go and it will be pve all the time for keep takes.

larsan wrote:In the real OF i could hold off a fg as a hunter, now they just laugh and beat down the doors with bare hands if they wanted to

Why was it possible there if i may ask?

The OF siege system is not inferior by any means. It is just different and asks the players for different approaches. The reason why for example a hunter is not able to defend versus a group of players, is because none of the more commonly raided keeps get properly claimed to max level keep- and door-wise. If both were upgraded to a decent level, a group of players would face problems, offering even a single defender enough time and opportunities to kill some of the attackers.

Also siege weapons are available in the OF system. Trebuchets, Catapults, Ballistas and Rams. For Trebuchets and Catapults you actually should have the choice of different ammunition: Grape (+AEradius -dmg), Ice or Fire (+dmg -AEradius), Stone (++dmg --AEradius); the plusses and minuses are only to show the difference between possible projectiles. On live servers Catapults/Trebuchets were commonly used to rupt (grape) defending casters.

Of course the OldFrontier Keeps do not offer such free spacings, asking the player to climb up the attachements of a keepwall, but still it is possible. The biggest difference when it comes to OF keeps is the fact, that each realm comes with different layouts, offering different approaches on how to defend.

The implementation of NFkeeps within the OldFrontiers would not be possible without delivering another client patch. However, just for your interest - I'm currently working on a texture upgrade that will at least enhance the graphical quality of the keeps. ETA 1-2 weeks.


Kind regards,
Sethor

I like the idea of NF keeps, cause like the OP said there isn't much fun in raiding nowadays, its just PvE while it should be PvP!!

And even if it were to be PvE, its still incorrect in many ways, archers can't be selected 75% of the time (while standing outside), guards in general are easily killed with 2 players and some classes can solo them, slow respawn of those same guards, papermaché doors, (even some keeps are just easy to take with just a handfull of crits jumping over the wall going straight for the lord), and so much more.

The rewards behind raiding is also a joke, there isn't reward for taking a keep, but you get rewarded if you kill enough guards ... -_-" . Furthermore defenders don't get anything at all. The only notable reward of having the majority of keeps is for DF sweep & worm party.

Talking about DF, that is also something nice about NF that dissapeared with OF, the fact that 2 realms could own DF at the same time, leading into nice DF PvP battles.

My conclusion,
OF is nice but has major flaws in terms of raiding, it should be a fun part of the PvP expierence but for the moment it just isn't. It has been distilled to PvE RP grinding for low RR players or high RR players that want DF back for sweep & worm.

the problem is not the keep layout

the problem is that it is not interesting to defend the keeps.. there is little to no reward for holding the keeps

DF? yaay, wait 30 mins and take another keep and you got it back
intel? uhm.. what for if you don't plan to go defend?

Adding a rp reward for successful defend or guild XP/craft/RP/money bonus for claiming the keeps..

now that would make it more vital and interesting to keep your keep defended and claimed

nixian wrote:the problem is not the keep layout

the problem is that it is not interesting to defend the keeps.. there is little to no reward for holding the keeps

DF? yaay, wait 30 mins and take another keep and you got it back
intel? uhm.. what for if you don't plan to go defend?

Adding a rp reward for successful defend or guild XP/craft/RP/money bonus for claiming the keeps..

now that would make it more vital and interesting to keep your keep defended and claimed

And that's exactly what's being discussed in the other thread. ^^

nixian wrote:the problem is not the keep layout

ever tried to kill an archer or otherway around ever tried to target something when standing on wall? The 'kantelen' http://www.mathieuinwonderland.nl/woordenschat/afb_kantelen.jpg
(don't know how its called in English) are placed to close to each other and thus are more like a regular wall then an abillity to cast/shoot a person down while having the advantage of hiding behind them when they target you.

Why do you think all medieval castles have them? For show ?

The OF keeps are in many ways a step back on the NF keeps in means of realism & tactics, no way to fall back, or using the defensive mechanics like oil or in RL stone/tree droppers.

DON'T get me wrong, I like OF in a whole, thus may it 'in my opinion' remain, but just the raid possibilities have been nerfed dramiticly and made it mindnuming dull.

What ever sollution the GM's prefer to make raiding & keep defending popular again

* Additional bonusses

nixian wrote:Adding a rp reward for successful defend or guild XP/craft/RP/money bonus for claiming the keeps..

* Reskin of OF keeps (making the little def capabillity they have usable)
* Replacing OF keeps by NF keeps
* Lowering BP costs bound to claiming and upgrading it to level6 (would make it harder to take as well)
* ...

doesn't matter to me, but I do beg/plee for a solution in any way.

Seyha wrote:

Phaeton wrote:if people loved keep sieges, then WAR might not have been such a failure

The keeps in WAR were terrible and the combat mechanics didn't mesh well with that type of gameplay.

in fact warhammer failed because the keeps where very simmilar to OF keeps. Sticking the Gate until its Open and trying to take down the defenders, who camped Inside the lordroom with tons of pbaoe.

It was terrible boring, just like OF is.

Tirax wrote:
in fact warhammer failed because the keeps where very simmilar to OF keeps. Sticking the Gate until its Open and trying to take down the defenders, who camped Inside the lordroom with tons of pbaoe.

It was terrible boring, just like OF is.

And where is the difference with NF keeps?

Sethor, I annotated your responses to help keep my post small.

Sethor wrote:OF Keeps require a different approach. Upgrade your keeps to help with defense.

I have caused small, low RR siege groups to whipe simply by picking off the healer. It is not impossible to defend an OF keep. It's simply frustrating, boring, and usually not very effective for all the reasons I mentioned earlier. Arnius illustrated the problem with OF keep design perfectly.

We have a lot of people saying there is no 'incentive' to defend OF Keeps, but there was never any special incentive to defend when we had NF! Yet people often defended keeps back in the NF days. Some of the most exciting and intense battles I've had on Uthgard were NF Keep Sieges. Taking a keep in NF was not the mundane thing that it is now, because the power of the guards combined with the capabilities of the defenders meant that you often had to cooperate to get it done.

This level of strategy and cooperation simply does not exist under OF. period. I challenge anyone to explain in terms of gameplay how an OF Keep siege can be even remotely as robust and entertaining as an NF Keep siege.

Siege weapons.

IIRC siege weapons don't do damage to the keep itself in OF. That is the main difference between OF and NF siege weapons. In NF you could use catapults to blast a hole in the wall or lower the level of the keep to make it easier to attack. The trade-off is that because this method takes longer you give the defending realm time to organize a counter-attack. That's strategy. That's an actual decision that you have to make, as opposed to just pounding on a door like you do in OF.

Of course the OldFrontier Keeps do not offer such free spacings, asking the player to climb up the attachements of a keepwall, but still it is possible. The biggest difference when it comes to OF keeps is the fact, that each realm comes with different layouts, offering different approaches on how to defend.

Sethor, I think you're giving the OF Keep designs way too much credit here. What is the tangible difference in defense for each realm's keep? Each keep has its own irritating LoS issues that must be over-come before you can even begin to do damage to the attackers. That's the only real difference in approach I can think of.

The Midgard keep is the "easiest" in this respect since it has two wall attachments and the court-yard is very open and simple. It is also the most boring keep style.

The Hib keep has the strangest layout. There are no climbing attachments at all, but ranged attackers can "jump-shoot" to hit their targets. This looks stupid, because it is stupid. It is stupid that as a Ranged attacker in OF sieges I have two options: jump up and down like an idiot, or climb on top of the battlements that are supposed to protect me, thereby completely exposing myself to a quick-cast stun+DD spam from almost ANY angle. The interior of the Hib keep certainly looks 'unique,' but it's really no different in principle from the other keeps; run up the stairs directly to the lord room.

The Alb Keep is the worst design by far. Correct me if I'm wrong, but there is only one wall-attachment. ONE. This means that defenders have one spot to defend the outside door from! You can try shooting through the battlement above the door, but all the enemy needs to do is strafe to the side a little and he will be out of view. The LoS issues in this keep are atrocious. The court-yard has a slightly interesting lay-out, but the interior is as lame as the other two keeps.

The implementation of NFkeeps within the OldFrontiers would not be possible without delivering another client patch. However, just for your interest - I'm currently working on a texture upgrade that will at least enhance the graphical quality of the keeps. ETA 1-2 weeks.

Kind regards,
Sethor

Well at least they'll look nice. Thanks for your response, Sethor.

vangonaj wrote:And where is the difference with NF keeps?

Because the stairs leading up to the lord room in NF keeps favor the attacker and defender equally. It is not nearly as hard to breach the lord room in an NF keep because you are at the top of the stairs before you enter the Lord room.

The WAR keep layout is almost exactly the same as the OF Relic Keep: A ramp leads directly into the lord room, but at a right angle. This means that all of the attackers must go up the ram and enter the lord room to be able to fight effectively.

The result is a lot of dead attackers just above the ramp, because they had to move out of LoS of their healers to get inside the lord room. It's a really bad design and I was when Mythic decided to use it in WAR.

So yeah, the keeps in WAR sucked because their interior design was taken from an OF keep.

Seyha wrote:

vangonaj wrote:And where is the difference with NF keeps?

Because the stairs leading up to the lord room in NF keeps favor the attacker and defender equally. It is not nearly as hard to breach the lord room in an NF keep because you are at the top of the stairs before you enter the Lord room.

Then why we need keeps? Where is the keep function, if is easy take one? For this we dont need keeps. Keeps are for give advantage for defenders no for attackers, and never for make keep battle equal. One keep should be easy for deffend and hard for take.