bawww wrote:Giving 100% to every point makes no sense.

It could be that all points apply to everyone in the set.

Like in:

100% of humans live on earth.
~50% of humans are male.
~50% of humans are female.

Oh noes, that adds up to 200% ... not.

I'm more concerned with his 4=3. But that's prolly just bad copypasta.

He is still obviously wrong.

1. Not adding indicating crave for RPs. Well, that's about as dumb as saying: taking a pass on food indicates hunger.
2. Adding a fair fight does not help your realm at all. I've said it before: people from other realms are your fellow players, too.
3. Most people that don't want to be added don't flame. Just like with people that want to add.
4. He does not understand what being horrible at a game means.
5. Not adding is equal to not being there in the first place. It does not change anything. Is he mad at the billions of people that do not add his fights?

Jarysa ^^

Nymeros wrote:Let's recap:

Me: Removing BGs won't work.
You: HOW U KNOW WITHOUT UR PRIVATE SERVER
Me:: How do *you* know it WILL work?
You:: I know!
Me:: ...
You:: No but you see I know my solution is worth trying because the positive impacts of the changes involved are merely logical consequences, thus easily argumented why they should be made.

You actually sat down and typed that out. Wow. Are you a wizard?

Actually it went:
Me: Removing BGs improves endRvR because x, y, z.
You: Removing BGs is stupid.
Me: Why?
You: Because I know.
Me: How on earth could u possibly know? (Private server etc, this was implicitly asking why you knew...)
You: WOW YOU'RE RETARDED; DERP!
Me: ... at least I'm argumenting why.
You: [Finally!] Explaining why...

Nymeros wrote:Ok, now I will address this AGAIN, as I have at least 2 times before. Removing the last BG doesn't create ANYTHING new.

I disagree, by making frontier RvR a very attractive way to gain XP (x20 XP per RvR kill) you will lure out players to RvR, not solely in non 50s grps, but in mixed groups.

What this does is allow the players who are not yet ready for endRvR level up first (in or outside of the frontiers) before actually going out to RvR, giving them a noticable levelbonus and thus an advantage over at least a portion of the other RvR population, increasing their chances of success. Such a character improvement over other RvR players is currently impossible.

By granting the x20 XP bonus per RvR kill, you prevent people from being forced into a PvE grind to 50 first because RvRing is just a more exciting way to level up, even if it does go slower in the long run.

Nymeros wrote:All those people are already there with or without the last BG. It just forces players who would play to 4L2 in Thid to (and pay attention now) ---------> TRY <--------- to RvR earlier.

I'm not expecting them to roam Emain, I'm expecting them to roam around XP spots and HW/Odins MGs with mixed groups. What level 50 DPS class will refuse grouping a lvl 45 support if there's plenty of viable action out for such a setup? DPS classes themselves at level 45 will have to do a bit more of an effort to get a grp, but will still manage as long as OF provides the right enemy action.

Nymeros wrote:Now, these people will be FORCED to RvR earlier, and there is a much higher chance they will get no groups due to the following facts:

a) They are low level and low RR
b) They have no experience
c) The don't just want to RvR, they also want to XP
d) The RvR community in general is very elitist and zerg-unfriendly

a) I think the level factor is overrated since there will actually be players out there with a (way) lower level for them to kill if they look in the right spots. The low RR is exactly the same now.
b) They have just as much experience as people who leave Thid at 49. BG RvR is BG RvR.
c) The moment they realise how good the XP is from killing RvR players in the frontiers, the players who are interested in RvRing will try to do so imo.
d) This is how we currently know it, you think it is unchangeable, I disagree. Change the setting correctlly and the mentality will follow.

Nymeros wrote:Now the way you think these issues will solve itself is that the "new" players will just group among themselves, either for XP or RvR or both, and that at some point there will be enough of them to shift the community in a more casual and low-level friendly direction. For this you have no proof whatsoever. None. Zero. Zilch. You can call it "logical" all you want, but there is no proof. I should also mention that I have no proof either, but I do have a clear overview of the servers behavior in the past. Now that's not proof, but it's a strong INDICATOR of the most possible outcome. You, of course, also know Uthgards community and history, but unlike me you choose to ignore them and the indicators they provide.

Exactly, you are right and I find this very well put. As you know however I do ignore these indicators because I believe that nothing is set in stone, not at all. I guess this is yet another pure disagreement.

Nymeros wrote:What you don't seem to understand is that by aggressively lobbying to remove the last BG you are in fact HURTING your own plans for improving endgame RvR. Here's why:


1.) If the BG stays the RR gap will be smaller, making the mentality transition you hope will come (elitist groups accepting newbs) more likely.

I disagree because I believe it's the factor of being the single lowest (RR/level/skill) RvR player out there what makes people not invite them, rather than what realmrank they are. As long as they're at the very bottom without any way to improve them but by trying to find a grp they will be stuck in such a position for a long long time to come.

Nymeros wrote:2.) If the BG stays the "new" players will al be lvl 50, thus also making it easier to get a group.

Same as above. As long as you can offer new players alternative, viable forms of RvR, they will have better chances at any level or RR. XPers alone could do this, allthough I think it's too unlikely for them to form a consistenly viable frontier population to be reliable as a full alternative. That is where removing the last BG provides an additional influx of less optimised RvR population, which helps their own chances of getting past those first levels after the BGs by providing them with easier targets.

Nymeros wrote:3.) If the BG stays, people will STILL be able to go out and TRY to XP those last levels in the Frontiers with the uber bonuses, where they can fight other XP groups over camps, fight with gankers and whatnot. No one is IMPRISONED in the BGs, and people still need to get groups, and there is still primetime and you haven't got action there 24/7 like some people seem to think. Actually the BGs are much less active then even OF, not to mention NF main areas, and they've never been a prime XP spot.

True, they will still be able to, but I think as I explained right above that the removal is needed to prevent the sole alternative for easier targets to be hunting xpers, since that would pressurise the xpers too much for it to be a viable alternative. Removing the BGs provides that extra amount of non 50s in RvR.

Nymeros wrote:4.) The BGs already have a deterrent, and it's the biggest one you can have in an MMO: Leveling a god-damned new character, again and again and AGAIN and never getting him over 4L2.

Yet end RvR is by far worse to a lot of players. That's how bad the transition is now I guess.

Nymeros wrote:5.) There ARE people who play only in BGs. They are a huge minority, but they are here. If you remove Thid, you will (and I say this with 100% certainty), LOSE these people. They will leave the server. Remember, these are people who hate OF so much that they are willing to level character after character, twink them, play them for only a few weeks and then scrap them to begin the process all over again, just so they avoid OF. These people will LEAVE and that's a negative hit to the player RvR pop right there (because they are, in fact, a significant part of the RvR population, since it's much smaller then the general server pop). On the other hand, it the other OF improvements work, you might get these players to join in in endgame RvR.

I disagree, the majority of these players play in BGs because they've seen and tried (OF) End RvR and decided they're never going to waste their efforts there again. Now if you would remove Thid without revamping the BGs and end RvR I agree that these players are likely to leave. If you do however I have to disagree, these players will lose 1 BG but also gain BGs at lower levels, making it easier to keep rerolling. They will, on top of that, actually have a better transition to end RvR should they decide to try it out again.

Basicly they've gotten more options than ever before and they would suddenly leave? No way imo.
PS: They don't hate OF, they hate how OF is on Uthgard now. If they do hate OF so much they will never even touch it, there's always other servers to try out.

Nymeros wrote:6.) The BGs are no competition whatsoever to endgame RvR when it comes to keep fight (which can also be improved!)

Keepfights are better in BGs or? I don't quite get what you're saying here.

Nymeros wrote:7.) The majority of the population the OF fixes will need to attract is not grinding BGs, they have in fact passed through the BGs and have now either drowned in the PvE part of the population or gone inactive. For the part that IS grinding, see number 5.

A lot of the population we lost due to bad transition to endRvR is doing other stuff now, I agree, and I'm pretty sure we have completely lost players that will refuse to play Uthgard again simply due to the situation. It's bad, I know. I disagree with number 5 though.

In any case if this does get fixed, it will only improve in the long run. That is also why it is crucial to fix it before or at the same time as Old RAs, which is another great motivator for people to try out Uthgard. If you manage to get them hooked to endRvR the first time they try this server, we can be sure to gain a lot of new steady (RvR) players.

Nymeros wrote:8.) The BGs are an important part of leveling a first character on this (or any) server, and, as I sad in the other topic, a legitimate way of bridging the minimum-required-to-get-invited-RR gap, which will NEVER (at best it can be lowered somewhat) disappear completely for a majority of active groups.

As I said I think the RR gap problem isn't the main issue, rather the lack of alternative RvR to Emain imo.

Nymeros wrote:And please, for the love of God, to all the people reading this who want group RvR and can't get a group for whatever reason: Get (not start, you're not capable of that) a god-damned guild.

Nearly every player I've seen failing in endRvR had "a guild". It's just almost impossible to get a guild (or even alliance) that is able to get reliable RvR grps out there without being established for several months already. The reason is imo that when a guild/grp/alliance/... is not with 8 competitive players, they can just log out if it's not primetime. If they could go do some smallman RvR instead whenever they were lacking players, this would be a lot worse.

Nymeros wrote:And I've been posting rebuttals for at least as long. I feel ya.

Nymeros wrote:No. I acknowledge any argument that I think is logical and likely to result in the intended outcome. You've posted a lot of potential RvR improvements and the BG issue is (at least to my knowledge) the only one with which I disagree with. I may not believe that the other stuff you suggested will work, but I am NOT AGAINST trying them out.

So chill out.

Okay.

Good post btw.

Some thing stay the same no matter how long you're away from the forum...

Blue wrote:

Celteen wrote:Yeah there are casuals that dont add, but most do, since they see no reason why not to =)

Why not, its a game of defending your realm from enemies and gather enemy lands together. This is the original idea.

+10 internets

Realms are well defended, nobody can get past the portal keeps anymore

There is a HUGE difference between Frontiers and battlegrounds and that should be considered when wondering why would someone prefer either one. What kind of play do you prefer? Running around in open field battle? Siege?

I know what I prefer. I prefer actual siege game: the castle, ballistas, rams, trebuchets, looking for the best LOS for a ranged attack, keeping them away from door, pulling to inner tower... and that I only find on BGs in this server. OF can be good for some things but FOR WHAT I LIKE it is BG. Understand? I do not run away from OF because the others have high RR (how to solve this? cap RR at 5?), I run away from it because I like a different kind of play than the one meant for that area. How do you defend/attack in siege if you do not have LOS on anything?! If you are in, you can not attack what is out, and if you are out you can not attack what is in... that is not siege. The way it works it is all about fighting in front of the relic keep, defeating the adversary, breaking the door before they come back, then defeating them again inside when they return with the doors broken. Again, that is no siege.

Now I understand why nobody wanted to buy my apparatus engines for even one gold: it is not that they are not buggy, it is the area that is not meant for using them, thus turning them useless... and I have to agree, I would not buy them too.

New Frontiers area may not "feel" classic, but at least there is possibility for both open field and siege and it does nothing to the balance, it is the map only, no skill or classes involved.

Rufus_The_Hermit wrote:There is a HUGE difference between Frontiers and battlegrounds and that should be considered when wondering why would someone prefer either one. What kind of play do you prefer? Running around in open field battle? Siege?

I know what I prefer. I prefer actual siege game: the castle, ballistas, rams, trebuchets, looking for the best LOS for a ranged attack, keeping them away from door, pulling to inner tower... and that I only find on BGs in this server. OF can be good for some things but FOR WHAT I LIKE it is BG. Understand? I do not run away from OF because the others have high RR (how to solve this? cap RR at 5?), I run away from it because I like a different kind of play than the one meant for that area. How do you defend/attack in siege if you do not have LOS on anything?! If you are in, you can not attack what is out, and if you are out you can not attack what is in... that is not siege. The way it works it is all about fighting in front of the relic keep, defeating the adversary, breaking the door before they come back, then defeating them again inside when they return with the doors broken. Again, that is no siege.

Now I understand why nobody wanted to buy my apparatus engines for even one gold: it is not that they are not buggy, it is the area that is not meant for using them, thus turning them useless... and I have to agree, I would not buy them too.

New Frontiers area may not "feel" classic, but at least there is possibility for both open field and siege and it does nothing to the balance, it is the map only, no skill or classes involved.

can you imagine what uthgard would be like today if instead of OF, development had been done to finish NF to live standards? agramon would be a fornication of death 24/7.

I'm guessing a fornication of death is a good thing

I think the argument pro NF is a good one. I too am beginning to feel that the Server has lost more than it has gained with the introduction of OF. While I was one of those voting for OF, I think the reality is playing out differently than I expected. Keep Raids have become a total snooze-fest, and there is little in terms of viable XP spots or things to do other than running an 8-man or camp the AMG. So naturally, a not-insignificant part of the player base feels left out and focuses on other activities.

Lasastard wrote:I think the argument pro NF is a good one. I too am beginning to feel that the Server has lost more than it has gained with the introduction of OF. While I was one of those voting for OF, I think the reality is playing out differently than I expected. Keep Raids have become a total snooze-fest, and there is little in terms of viable XP spots or things to do other than running an 8-man or camp the AMG. So naturally, a not-insignificant part of the player base feels left out and focuses on other activities.

Issues we are working on please give us some time. We are a bit short on man power.

Lasastard wrote:I think the argument pro NF is a good one. I too am beginning to feel that the Server has lost more than it has gained with the introduction of OF. While I was one of those voting for OF, I think the reality is playing out differently than I expected. Keep Raids have become a total snooze-fest, and there is little in terms of viable XP spots or things to do other than running an 8-man or camp the AMG. So naturally, a not-insignificant part of the player base feels left out and focuses on other activities.

I started here since I loved OF once, but as it turned out it does'nt really fit to Uthgard imo, the population is just too low. On live you could go to Odins / Emain / HW, action everywhere. But on Uthgard all I can do as a duo is go mmg - mtk in emain - poor Mids =)
Other zones are dead for small mean, amg - atk is FG zone. I mean it's funny to roam there once in a while but not for month

@Staff: This is no (big) offence but: Don't implement unfinished things like JoWood published Gothic 3..

Celteen wrote:

Lasastard wrote:I think the argument pro NF is a good one. I too am beginning to feel that the Server has lost more than it has gained with the introduction of OF. While I was one of those voting for OF, I think the reality is playing out differently than I expected. Keep Raids have become a total snooze-fest, and there is little in terms of viable XP spots or things to do other than running an 8-man or camp the AMG. So naturally, a not-insignificant part of the player base feels left out and focuses on other activities.

I started here since I loved OF once, but as it turned out it does'nt really fit to Uthgard imo, the population is just too low. On live you could go to Odins / Emain / HW, action everywhere. But on Uthgard all I can do as a duo is go mmg - mtk in emain - poor Mids =)
Other zones are dead for small mean, amg - atk is FG zone. I mean it's funny to roam there once in a while but not for month

Thats because players on live played OF and did not reroll or stay in BG's. This is an Uthgard typical problem. The population is there. If 600 players of 800 would be in OF you couldnt say that there is too less action. The opposite would be the case.
Its not even the problem to get 50 like some think. Its the repeatedly twinking just to evade the main RvR.

As long as Uthgard exists I hear the same arguments about endgame RvR. It really comes down to players behaviour in the end. It was that way in NF Emain, its was that way in NF Agramon (without xp spots), its similar that way in OF but in fact a bit less pronounced than before. Lookup old threads and you will find the same discussion over and over. Theres some serious design problem on Uthgard and I think BG's play a major role in that.

It needs some goal for the low ranked player in OF. Which will help him to gain some RP here and there and where he can meet other low ranked players. Else he will be disappointed for not getting invited in groups and reroll another char or quit.