Zarkor wrote:The fact that you do not need a great setup and thus are able to build, join and find PuGs much more rapidly and the fact that you can meet enemies that are a lot less stronger than average (high level without good gear is somewhat average in BGs).

Both of those things are inherent in the Battlegrounds/RvR distinction, so by removing that distinction you would not SHARE them between settings but actually destroy them.

What you're saying is like suggesting that jumping up and down is superior to both walking and flying simply because it's a makesihft hybrid of the two.

Nymeros wrote:Both of those things are inherent in the Battlegrounds/RvR distinction, so by removing that distinction you would not SHARE them between settings but actually destroy them.

What you're saying is like suggesting that jumping up and down is superior to both walking and flying simply because it's a makesihft hybrid of the two.

No, they are inherent in the distinction on the current Uthgard setting. Back in the day on classic live they were given for any type of RvR (BG/OF). The possibility was there, just as there was a possibility to maximise your setup, tactic and skills, which was just less common. I admit that the BG and frontier setup was not the only decisive factor for this. The fact that there were a lot more casual players due to the game being new, is also playing a role. However, if you compare today's Uthgard playerbase, you can still see that the majority of the players can still be called casual, which shows that there still is a very large number of potential end RvR players that are currently excluded from RvRing in the frontiers, mainly due to the current setting.
This is a structural problem, which can be solved by looking at how it was back on classic and thinking about how to improve that.

You obviously do not see this as a problem, because apparently you don't believe it's possible to have 300-500 people in the frontiers compared to the current 50-150. And even if it would be possible, you are of the opinion that by offering the solution to that, you will destroy both BG and OF RvR. Correct?

BGs will not cease to exist or to have success amongst the casual players. They will just be less influencial and important than they are now and they won't be the casual player's last resort for RvR exactly because it's then possible for those players to keep enjoying their own playstyle (even tho it will be slightly slower) AFTER the BGs, which I think is definately a lot better for any (classic) DAoC server.

Especially if you compare it to our current state, where RvR playstyles are heavily split up (even though this game is basicly all about RvR) and BG and end RvR are completely different worlds that seem to exist as seperate games within the server, instead of being fluidly interconnected, so that players who want to play the RvR game their own way are not forced to play either this(BGs) or that(OF), but can still chose between either of those without having to sacrifice too much time, effort and fun doing so.
At the moment, having those late BGs also partially destroys one of the attractive elements of end RvR, which is that it's the only way to keep progressing and enjoying your character almost without end because level 49 RR4L2 is already very advanced back in the DAoC carreer, which makes being able to exceed that point even less attractive and useful, especially if you have to sacrifice your playstyle in order to do so, the choice is made practicly before even setting 1 step into end RvR.

The thing is though, that BGs initially were not intended as a place where you can progress as far as possible (end RvR was), in order to sort of provide an alternative to end RvR. It was more of an RvR snack on the way to the end game instead. This allows for those BGs to start AND end early in the level and RR range, since the only reason for the BGs to end late now is to improve the transition between BGs and end RvR, while in fact all it does is make things worse and destroys the entire attractive element of being able to progress your character almost eternally without having to abandon your playstyle for it.

I hope you can understand now why having BGs to lvl 49 RR4L2 is part of the problem (whether or not you see it as one), aswell as the lack of attraction to the frontiers.

Zarkor wrote:You obviously do not see this as a problem, because apparently you don't believe it's possible to have 300-500 people in the frontiers compared to the current 50-150. And even if it would be possible, you are of the opinion that by offering the solution to that, you will destroy both BG and OF RvR. Correct?

Nope, I just disagree with your particular solution.

And the answer to the wall of text: BGs were never a problem with NF and they are not a problem unto themsleves as proven by years of co-existence with endgame RvR on Live, even with /rp off. OF is what's making them a problem becouse OF is by default more primitive in design and map layout and much less friendly to casual play. So instead of fixing OF so it can be a viable alternative, your suggestion is to eliminate the more fun and casual choice, thus automatically making the inferior system you favor more desirable, and that is just wrong, biased and unfair.

Do you perhaps have a different solution then, or do you think it's not needed?

You can't easily compare NF live's population and setting with the current Uthgard population. The majority of the players there were already primarily focused on endgame RvR by their server experiences before NF, aswell as by the fact that by then, RvR and gameplay at level 50 meant a lot more depth and usable skills than there were at the lower BG levels (besides Leirvik).
In classic DAoC, there are barely any differences besides RR when it comes to BG vs end RvR, which diminishes the attraction towards end RvR and so makes BG RvR the easier and more rewarding choice below a certain competitive level. Also NF RAs offer a lot more due to lower costs on lower RR, which only removes the differences between end RvR and BGs even further compared to Old RAs.

Also, the Uthgard population is quite a bit different when it comes to composition. Live had a lot larger established and developed RvR communities than we have now on Uthgard, most of them were the result of years of server experience and realm cohesion. Server numbers were usually declining rather than rising, the few new players that joined didn't really create any change to the already determined population spreading.
On Uthgard we have a small core of established end RvR players with a large amount of people who have either abandoned end RvR or simply not yet experienced it. Uthgard is growing and is seeing a lot more players that steadily enter end RvR bit by bit. There is no simultaneous influx because not everyone XPs and gets templated as fast as the other. This small but steady increase however does not lead to an equally small but steady increase in the end RvR population. I've seen it happen over and over in Hib, and I would be surprised if it weren't the same in Alb and partially also in Mid.
What's happening now is that players tend to join end RvR, only to bump into almost only 1 specific viable playstyle: 8v8 RvR, which also wasn't the case on live. This results into a situation where even competitive and end RvR minded players manage to create a lack of interest because there is just no viable alternative for their lvl 50 whenever their group can not compete, they can't manage to build or join a group, don't have time to search for players for 30 minutes etc etc, which really is all too common, especially in Alb and Hib.
Because of this, the RvR population on Uthgard remains compact and hard to enter properly, since PuGs are hardly capable of providing enough viable RvR possibilities in the long term due to their fragility and fairly high chances on becoming a source of frustration. This leads to a setting where almost the entire rather stable regular end RvR population exists from established RvR guilds. It's also harder for new players to create a new RvR guild on the server itself because not many other players actually stick around long enough in end RvR because of the problems mentioned above.

These two factors add up to the fact that entire OF (but also entire NF) does need a rather high overall population to really shine. The lower the population, the worse it becomes, since less action or action possibilities mean less fun, and less players, and so forth. This has barely anything to do with map layout and being 'primitive'. The thing that matters most is the sheer size of the environment, which would've caused similar problems with the entire NF zones, which we never used on Uthgard for that exact reason: size.


In all, these are 3 elements that enforce the current trend. The fourth would be that the BGs offer the almost perfect solution to that situation. As stated above they hardly are any different to end RvR when it comes to character progression, but have all the ingredients necessary to sustain casual RvR, whereas OF currently has none. This leads to an easy choice to everyone who's given up on end RvR for casual RvR for the obvious reasons and creates the known Uthgard casual RvR player pattern:grind to 50->gear up, get RR4(can take a month or 2)->check out end RvR->get bored/frustrated and reroll or leave(usually takes around a month if that) OR find a good guild and stay to do end RvR with the guild and pick BG RvR for casual RvR.



This is how it stands and why you can't just compare it to any other server around. It's unique to Uthgard and is the source of the saying "Uthgard is a PvE server", which really is kind of true if you look at it. The majority of the players ends up levelling and getting 50 only to realise that they still need BGs and thus characters below 50 to enjoy those when it comes to casual RvR. Some end up levelling BG chars all the way, some manage to get into the RvR community with their 50s, but most if not all resort to BGs when it comes to casual RvR, which is why smallman and solo action is close to death.

Implementing /rp off in the current state of the server could be tricky, seeing as the already fragile (when it comes to enjoying your free time fully) end RvR would then lose another aspect in its favor, being the possibility to finalise your character's position without having to spend additional investments into it. Sadly, this is only a poorly effective measure to give end RvR the edge when the rest of the influencial elements are completely ignored and misplaced.
However, if you have an end RvR setting that can provide both casual and high standard RvR (is/was the case on live), has enough incentives to be attractive when it comes to character improvement(is/was the case on live) and is generally well populated and active(is/was the case on live), you CAN afford to enable /rp off.
Why? Because BGs are then what they are supposed to be: a simplified stadium of the real RvR stage, with just a slightly better setting for casual RvR compared to a still decent casual RvR possibility in end RvR. Instead of being basicly the ONLY place for casual RvR (like it is on Uthgard) it's actually a less advanced ALTERNATIVE to casual RvR.


My suggestion was never to eliminate the more fun and casual choice, because it's simply not necessary and even stupid to eliminate them to solve the problem. My suggestion is simply trying to create a worthy alternative because currently the BGs are no alternative to casual RvR, they are the one and only real choice for it. Sure, BG RvR will not be possible on a level where characters are advanced so far, but that's also never been the intention of BGs in the first place and has now become a possibility which has a larger negative impact on the end RvR situation than it has a positive impact on BG RvR in its whole, since level and character progression in BGs hardly alter the actual BG experience in essence.

Saying that my suggestion contains the elimination of that possibility is just not true and therefore an invalid argument. BG RvR stays BG RvR, be it at level 20, 35 or 45. The general concept and experience remain similar. Removing the upper BGs is completely different from removing the BGs or BG possibilities in a whole. Pushing the BGs back to a maximum level of 35 or even 40 will not harm that choice, action or playstyle significantly, besides for the players who are already above that level of course, which really is only temporarily. If you want to play in BGs and experience BG style RvR, you still can just as good. In fact, as said above, it would be viable to enable the /rp off command in such a setting, which in the end is even improving that possibility.



You disagreed with me for biased reasons. I hope I cleared this up.

too long post to read

elTakapiru wrote:too long post to read

Too deep problems to write shorter posts.

I dont see how having no BG from lvl 40 on will make this server any more fun regardless of the pychological tricks to get more zergs to OF, since leveling from that lvl on is the most boring grind you can get...

And as i stated in the last topic of yours, xp alone wont push anyone to a harmful zone. Moreover, it's kind of amusing you trying to promote xp-grp gank-gameplay... confusing...

Jeah remove all BGs. Only not a lvl 25-35 one. Really funny:)

PvE exping from lvl 1-30 to get a chance in the BG and again from 35 to 50... What are you talking about PvE Uthgard?

Other choice great exping in OF zones: Oh more easy rp for High RRs also a good idea, but low rr and high rr wouldnt be a difference with old RAs then XD

Zarkor give it up.

OF is a imbalanced map. If you´re unlucky noone comes through a MG without are ganked by a zerg. Also there arent many geographic fight possibilities... no bridge or water fights:(

NF with all zones would be wonderful, but with the function that y can see bigger incs on warmap.

Hobbes wrote:I dont see how having no BG from lvl 40 on will make this server any more fun regardless of the pychological tricks to get more zergs to OF, since leveling from that lvl on is the most boring grind you can get...

It won't be (more) boring since in order to reduce that "most boring grind" to a minimum you will have to risk going out into the frontiers to xp, which, if done right, won't be as empty and safe to xp in as it is now. No there won't be high RR FGs roaming to kill 4 lvl 42 xpers, no there won't be 20 man xper zergs to hunt down other xpers, but there WILL be smaller grps of 50, close to FG grps of xpers and soloers hunting and lurking to kill xpers and eachother, which creates the possibility for casual RvR, which is currently inexistant.
The only time when it gets boring is when you manage to find a kind of safe spot, which isn't bad anyway since you'll be getting good xp for it.

Also, the point is not to get more zergs into OF, that's just an additional possibility that comes with making OF more attractive to players betwen 35-50 or 40-50. The priority of that measure is to allow for casual RvR, which currently is inexistant for any reasonbale player.

Hobbes wrote:And as i stated in the last topic of yours, xp alone wont push anyone to a harmful zone. Moreover, it's kind of amusing you trying to promote xp-grp gank-gameplay... confusing...

First of all the incentives do not hold xp alone. The primary target is for OF to hold action outside Emain, partially caused by xp rewards. This allows for casual RvR, which is the main goal.

The real reason OF is currently a "harmful" zone is exactly BECAUSE it doesn't allow for casual RvR and so only generates the high standard RvR that we know in Emain.


You don't see how it would work because you don't think it through nor actually read what I said, judging from your reply.

Rent wrote:Jeah remove all BGs. Only not a lvl 25-35 one. Really funny:)

PvE exping from lvl 1-30 to get a chance in the BG and again from 35 to 50... What are you talking about PvE Uthgard?

Other choice great exping in OF zones: Oh more easy rp for High RRs also a good idea, but low rr and high rr wouldnt be a difference with old RAs then XD

Zarkor give it up.

OF is a imbalanced map. If you´re unlucky noone comes through a MG without are ganked by a zerg. Also there arent many geographic fight possibilities... no bridge or water fights:(

NF with all zones would be wonderful, but with the function that y can see bigger incs on warmap.

NF isn't coming back and especially not with the built in radar function. The weak arguments about water and keepfights are just details when it comes to discussing the actual causes of the current issues.

I've also never said that we should remove everything but braemar and keep that as it is. I said split up the current Braemar into the 3 Old BGs and use that instead. Perhaps have a last BG from 36-39/40.
Of course, like Hobbes, you failed to read through my posts properly and are now misunderstanding and misjudging the whole idea.

Come back when you think you realise what and why I am making these posts or just don't, it's more than annoying to invest time to counter your mindless and senseless trolling.



It's quite clear that barely any forum reader so far has actually gotten the point I'm trying to make, which is quite unfortunate. If you have any serious questions, please ask. If you can't be bothered to read things properly, don't bother to post either.

Zarkor wrote:It's quite clear that barely any forum reader so far has actually gotten the point I'm trying to make, which is quite unfortunate.

So you needed to start a new topic debating the same problems, suggesting the same ideas and come to this above quoted same conclusion/rant? What is wrong with us...?!

Zarkor wrote:Do you perhaps have a different solution then, or do you think it's not needed?

You can't easily compare NF live's population and setting with the current Uthgard population. The majority of the players there were already primarily focused on endgame RvR by their server experiences before NF, aswell as by the fact that by then, RvR and gameplay at level 50 meant a lot more depth and usable skills than there were at the lower BG levels (besides Leirvik).
In classic DAoC, there are barely any differences besides RR when it comes to BG vs end RvR, which diminishes the attraction towards end RvR and so makes BG RvR the easier and more rewarding choice below a certain competitive level. Also NF RAs offer a lot more due to lower costs on lower RR, which only removes the differences between end RvR and BGs even further compared to Old RAs.

Also, the Uthgard population is quite a bit different when it comes to composition. Live had a lot larger established and developed RvR communities than we have now on Uthgard, most of them were the result of years of server experience and realm cohesion. Server numbers were usually declining rather than rising, the few new players that joined didn't really create any change to the already determined population spreading.
On Uthgard we have a small core of established end RvR players with a large amount of people who have either abandoned end RvR or simply not yet experienced it. Uthgard is growing and is seeing a lot more players that steadily enter end RvR bit by bit. There is no simultaneous influx because not everyone XPs and gets templated as fast as the other. This small but steady increase however does not lead to an equally small but steady increase in the end RvR population. I've seen it happen over and over in Hib, and I would be surprised if it weren't the same in Alb and partially also in Mid.
What's happening now is that players tend to join end RvR, only to bump into almost only 1 specific viable playstyle: 8v8 RvR, which also wasn't the case on live. This results into a situation where even competitive and end RvR minded players manage to create a lack of interest because there is just no viable alternative for their lvl 50 whenever their group can not compete, they can't manage to build or join a group, don't have time to search for players for 30 minutes etc etc, which really is all too common, especially in Alb and Hib.
Because of this, the RvR population on Uthgard remains compact and hard to enter properly, since PuGs are hardly capable of providing enough viable RvR possibilities in the long term due to their fragility and fairly high chances on becoming a source of frustration. This leads to a setting where almost the entire rather stable regular end RvR population exists from established RvR guilds. It's also harder for new players to create a new RvR guild on the server itself because not many other players actually stick around long enough in end RvR because of the problems mentioned above.

These two factors add up to the fact that entire OF (but also entire NF) does need a rather high overall population to really shine. The lower the population, the worse it becomes, since less action or action possibilities mean less fun, and less players, and so forth. This has barely anything to do with map layout and being 'primitive'. The thing that matters most is the sheer size of the environment, which would've caused similar problems with the entire NF zones, which we never used on Uthgard for that exact reason: size.


In all, these are 3 elements that enforce the current trend. The fourth would be that the BGs offer the almost perfect solution to that situation. As stated above they hardly are any different to end RvR when it comes to character progression, but have all the ingredients necessary to sustain casual RvR, whereas OF currently has none. This leads to an easy choice to everyone who's given up on end RvR for casual RvR for the obvious reasons and creates the known Uthgard casual RvR player pattern:grind to 50->gear up, get RR4(can take a month or 2)->check out end RvR->get bored/frustrated and reroll or leave(usually takes around a month if that) OR find a good guild and stay to do end RvR with the guild and pick BG RvR for casual RvR.



This is how it stands and why you can't just compare it to any other server around. It's unique to Uthgard and is the source of the saying "Uthgard is a PvE server", which really is kind of true if you look at it. The majority of the players ends up levelling and getting 50 only to realise that they still need BGs and thus characters below 50 to enjoy those when it comes to casual RvR. Some end up levelling BG chars all the way, some manage to get into the RvR community with their 50s, but most if not all resort to BGs when it comes to casual RvR, which is why smallman and solo action is close to death.

Implementing /rp off in the current state of the server could be tricky, seeing as the already fragile (when it comes to enjoying your free time fully) end RvR would then lose another aspect in its favor, being the possibility to finalise your character's position without having to spend additional investments into it. Sadly, this is only a poorly effective measure to give end RvR the edge when the rest of the influencial elements are completely ignored and misplaced.
However, if you have an end RvR setting that can provide both casual and high standard RvR (is/was the case on live), has enough incentives to be attractive when it comes to character improvement(is/was the case on live) and is generally well populated and active(is/was the case on live), you CAN afford to enable /rp off.
Why? Because BGs are then what they are supposed to be: a simplified stadium of the real RvR stage, with just a slightly better setting for casual RvR compared to a still decent casual RvR possibility in end RvR. Instead of being basicly the ONLY place for casual RvR (like it is on Uthgard) it's actually a less advanced ALTERNATIVE to casual RvR.


My suggestion was never to eliminate the more fun and casual choice, because it's simply not necessary and even stupid to eliminate them to solve the problem. My suggestion is simply trying to create a worthy alternative because currently the BGs are no alternative to casual RvR, they are the one and only real choice for it. Sure, BG RvR will not be possible on a level where characters are advanced so far, but that's also never been the intention of BGs in the first place and has now become a possibility which has a larger negative impact on the end RvR situation than it has a positive impact on BG RvR in its whole, since level and character progression in BGs hardly alter the actual BG experience in essence.

Saying that my suggestion contains the elimination of that possibility is just not true and therefore an invalid argument. BG RvR stays BG RvR, be it at level 20, 35 or 45. The general concept and experience remain similar. Removing the upper BGs is completely different from removing the BGs or BG possibilities in a whole. Pushing the BGs back to a maximum level of 35 or even 40 will not harm that choice, action or playstyle significantly, besides for the players who are already above that level of course, which really is only temporarily. If you want to play in BGs and experience BG style RvR, you still can just as good. In fact, as said above, it would be viable to enable the /rp off command in such a setting, which in the end is even improving that possibility.



You disagreed with me for biased reasons. I hope I cleared this up.

Ok, the first four paragraphs are an accurate description of the problem, and I agree with them, APART from the bit about map layout. I really think you are not even aware how greatly you underestimate the impact of it on casual RvR, probably because you don't play Albion. Our gate is camped 24/7, can you even understand what that means? I run mostly in a duo/trio, and we have to burn SOS like <70% of time just to PASS OUR GOD DAMNED GATE. If I'm solo on my friar I can't do anything except cross my fingers and hope for the best. Can you even imagine how demotivating that is to a casual player? And then another wait for port, another death at the gate, etc etc.

About /rp off - I also agree that it would damaging. I try very hard to remain objective in all things, and I have to confess that /rp off WOULD have a negative effect on endgame RvR.

However, it is very important to distinguish excatly what part of endgame RvR would be affected. In my opinion, it would mostly be solo/smallman, and that category is almost non-existent as it is! You can't "remove" people from somewhere if they're already hardly playing. You can either totally ignore them (as is the current case) or give them at lease *some* option to play, even if that means they'll never get to lvl 50 and about 4L2. I would even accept that instead of the /rp off command we are granted the ability to do a complete rps wipe on a character, so instead of being stuck forever on 4l2, a person who wanted to stay in the bgs had to go back to RR0L0.

The problem here is OF, as there is a hard limit on what you can do with it, and those limits are map layout and port timers. You are here preaching a bright and better future with bg removal, just like are with OF RAs and just like you were with OF implementation - and what have we got? Try to be honest and look at the server situation. Apart from around +300 player population, what do we have? Solo and smallman destroyed, zerging and adding reinforced as the dominant style of play. Is that the brighter future you and the other OF people were so eager to have?

I am telling you in good conscience that you are wrong, and that things don't work that way. OF simply CAN NOT be improved beyond a certain point, and everything with NF mechanics will ALWAYS be better for the casual player. Simply removing those alternatives is not a fix, it's a prison sentence.

If OF became the dominate zone for PvE, the small man/solo action would be greatly improved.


There are steps that could be taken to ensure this happened.

Yes, Force.

I believe noone would roll with a high RR FG over the poor levler and only solo - small grps will camp there. (sarcasm)

Forget it or show your steps;)

edit:There is already a bonus up to 40% and you dont know our Uth High RRs... They would farm every small piece of a map to get RPs XD

Rent wrote:Yes, Force.

I believe noone would roll with a high RR FG over the poor levler and only solo - small grps will camp there. (sarcasm)

Forget it or show your steps;)

I think it would be a massive waste of time to put together an FG of high RRs to go kill soloers/PVErs in alb/mid frontiers. A high RR FG can roll the Fgs in emain and get way more RPS per hour without having to worry which camps have PVErs at them in mid/alb. Roaming the entire alb frontiers is one giant pain in the butt and I don't see any high RR 8 man even considering unless action is trash in emain.

For small man/soloers however, the option is rewarding since the high RR FGs will roll them over in emain. I suppose you would have PUGs that can't go well in emain traveling to mid/alb in search of the small mans that are preying on the PVErs, but that's RvR.

And if this change brought that much action out to the frontier, then mission accomplished. If action is so terrible in emain that the 8 mans are willing to move to alb/mid frontier, and actually have that as an option, that's a good thing. Options are good


I would give a 50% XP bonus for PVE in the frontiers, and also make the mob respawn time much faster.

Force wrote:I think it would be a massive waste of time to put together an FG of high RRs to go kill soloers/PVErs in alb/mid frontiers. A high RR FG can roll the Fgs in emain and get way more RPS per hour without having to worry which camps have PVErs at them in mid/alb. Roaming the entire alb frontiers is one giant pain in the butt and I don't see any high RR 8 man even considering unless action is trash in emain.

For small man/soloers however, the option is rewarding since the high RR FGs will roll them over in emain. I suppose you would have PUGs that can't go well in emain traveling to mid/alb in search of the small mans that are preying on the PVErs, but that's RvR.

And if this change brought that much action out to the frontier, then mission accomplished. If action is so terrible in emain that the 8 mans are willing to move to alb/mid frontier, and actually have that as an option, that's a good thing. Options are good


I would give a 50% XP bonus for PVE in the frontiers, and also make the mob respawn time much faster.

Thank you for getting the point. My view on the solution also holds a push back of the latest BG to level 40 or even 35 to further increase frontier PvE and/or PvE hunting more attractive to players above lvl 35 or 40. I think the best setup would probably be to have something similar to the following BG setup:

*Old Thidranki: 20-24 RR1L6
*Old BG nr 2 (cant recall exact name atm): 25-29 RR2L2
*Old BG nr 3 (same as above): 30-34 RR2L8
*NF BG x: 35-39 RR3L4

This way there is still a considerable difference between end and BG RvR when it comes to depth and character improvement to further develop OF as the main PvE AND casual end RvR environment, but still leaves a big enough gap for the players to get accustomed to the frontiers and its contents, both action as PvE wise. Not to mention they will stand a better chance against their opponents at lvl 40 3L4 than they would at lvl 35 RR2L8 or 2L2.

Nymeros wrote:Ok, the first four paragraphs are an accurate description of the problem, and I agree with them, APART from the bit about map layout. I really think you are not even aware how greatly you underestimate the impact of it on casual RvR, probably because you don't play Albion. Our gate is camped 24/7, can you even understand what that means? I run mostly in a duo/trio, and we have to burn SOS like <70% of time just to PASS OUR GOD DAMNED GATE. If I'm solo on my friar I can't do anything except cross my fingers and hope for the best. Can you even imagine how demotivating that is to a casual player? And then another wait for port, another death at the gate, etc etc.

This is indeed typical for OF, but it does not influence the existance and status of smallman RvR as much as other aspects that are stated above. Why? Because casual RvR needs 1 main ingredient to even exist: sufficient xpers in the frontiers.
The fact that you can not pass Emain AMG is quite irrelevant to the cause and solution of the problem. In fact it is caused by the inexistance of casual RvR itself instead of the other way around and therefore should not be an argument against finding a solution. Quite the opposite even. The moment you give those stealthzergs the chance to stop teaming up and lame about at the MGs and still have fun playing their toon in end RvR, they will try it out occasionally and eventually abandon their current routine. They only have this routine because they have nowhere else to go except for BGs, which they obviously dont want to.
Not to mention, Emain is and never will be the primary place for casual RvR, which also kind of breaks down the argumental aspect of this statement.


So, let's talk about the differences in setting and layout between OF and NF:

In NF there was a different approach to RvR in its whole. The setting in NF caused for a situation where all action was explicitely combined into one specific zone: Agaramon. In order to succesfully make this a place suitable for as many playstyles as possible, you needed 2 milegates instead of one to allow for those players to venture out without getting ganked every single time, like it happens now when you try to combine playstyles in Emain. This was how NF handled it.
OF handles it the other way. Instead of having 2 milegates, OF has 3 seperate frontiers, all with just 1 milegat per realm entrance. The good thing here is that action becomes easily seperated, so that both can coexist without harmful interferance. Having just one of those bottlenecks also allows for easier action hotspots for those playstyles.

In short, OF allows you to seperate different actiontypes with better bottlenecks, whereas NF allows you to sustain a mix of the actiontypes with less influencial bottlenecks. I guess both have their ups and downs. I can't really argue which one is obviously the better because you can not see everything in the perspective of 1 playstyle either. That's actually how all this ended up this bad. Better bottlenecks is a good thing especially for FG RvR, but when you are stuck with all RvR in one place, you can't afford to have just one bottleneck per spawn area.
If you insist on trying to do casual RvR in OF Emain, the one zone that is the haven for all but casual RvR, I can understand why you think NF was so much better than OF. As you see, it really isn't, it's just different.

However on Uthgard currently, things are messed up so bad that the seperation of the action aswell as having xpers in frontiers is simply inexistant, combined with the fact that BGs are taking over casual end RvR territory because casual end RvR is simply inexistant due to the previous reasons. The current setting is actually making it worse day by day.

This problem is real and needs urgent attention. It's not that hard to solve, it just requires a rather small effort and common sense.


So, we can conclude NF did have the requirements to do somewhat viable casual RvR, which made it exist. But it still didn't flourish as much as it should in an RvR game such as DAoC because of the other factors (extremely late BGs, too high standards, ...) even though 2 major requirements were in place (PvE activity and the possibility to coëxist with the more dominant playstyle).

As said above, with current OF we even lack the possibility to do casual end RvR at all, which only intensifies the BG attraction which makes the problem even worse because it gets harder to reverse. Not because of the layout of OF (it solves the different playstyle options differently than NF, but it solves them nonetheless), but because of the way the staff has implemented it right now. (awful xp possibilities and bonusses, negative side effects from the late BG system, non-existant playstyle coëxistance possibility, ...)
Other measures besides creating the 2 major requirements for casual end RvR are possible to help solve the problem, but they remain insuffecient on their own. Just look at the horse routes. They just don't have any significant impact when they are implemented alone.

Nymeros wrote:About /rp off - I also agree that it would damaging. I try very hard to remain objective in all things, and I have to confess that /rp off WOULD have a negative effect on endgame RvR.

However, it is very important to distinguish excatly what part of endgame RvR would be affected. In my opinion, it would mostly be solo/smallman, and that category is almost non-existent as it is! You can't "remove" people from somewhere if they're already hardly playing.

Exactly! However, this is where the problem already lies and this is very important to realise. As long as you don't get that having end RvR which does not support as much playstyle options as possible, or better yet only supports ONE single option is a very severe problem, you will never even think of solving anything related to it.

End RvR should support the entire package of playstyle possibilities, not be a place where DAoC RvR gets narrowed down to one single way of playing it.

This is the problem I'm trying to point out and offer solutions for.

Nymeros wrote:You can either totally ignore them (as is the current case) or give them at lease *some* option to play, even if that means they'll never get to lvl 50 and about 4L2. I would even accept that instead of the /rp off command we are granted the ability to do a complete rps wipe on a character, so instead of being stuck forever on 4l2, a person who wanted to stay in the bgs had to go back to RR0L0.

The problem here is OF, as there is a hard limit on what you can do with it, and those limits are map layout and port timers. You are here preaching a bright and better future with bg removal, just like are with OF RAs and just like you were with OF implementation - and what have we got? Try to be honest and look at the server situation. Apart from around +300 player population, what do we have? Solo and smallman destroyed, zerging and adding reinforced as the dominant style of play. Is that the brighter future you and the other OF people were so eager to have?

I am telling you in good conscience that you are wrong, and that things don't work that way. OF simply CAN NOT be improved beyond a certain point, and everything with NF mechanics will ALWAYS be better for the casual player. Simply removing those alternatives is not a fix, it's a prison sentence.

You make a very serious mistake here, which only leads to a way of thinking that intensifies the actual problem by trying to 'improve' the already malfunctioning situation. You are saying that the problem we have now with OF and the Uthgard setting is irreversable and insolvable. This is simply not true.

The reason you believe it's true is because you almost seem to want to be in this situation, aswell as a misunderstanding of how things work and are supposed to work and I will explain why you are wrong about it below.


You CAN establish casual RvR naturally (meaning that it's entirely player driven due to the attraction casual RvR creates). Just like you can improve and expand it where it already exists. Whether this is in NF or OF is of rather low importance. The only difference in NF is that you will always have a basic element that helps you start off: there is no need to seperate action because all action almost automaticly is concentrated in 1 zone with several milegates per realm entrance.
OF handles this differently by offering the possibility to seperate the action into different frontiers, which is also granted, but not as easily well-exploited as in NF. So yes, it IS impossible without the right conditions and NF has an easier time supporting multiple forms of RvR. However this doesnt mean it's actually impossible at all. Creating the conditions needed for OF to support casual RvR is NOT that hard, gamebreaking or negative as you are trying to make it look.

You need at least 2 basic aspects to re-establish casual RvR without harming high standard end RvR (the currently only naturally existing form of end RvR).
These would be:
- Attracting a suffecient number of PvE players into the frontiers. As long as this condition is not there, you will not be able to have a naturally sustained healthy casual RvR environment. A suffecient number means enough players to viably maintain the RvR chain of PvE hunters, PvE hunter gankers and PvErs themselves without having one of those groups kill off the others simply because there's not enough to go around.
- Allowing for seperation of playstyles by offering enough activity and incentives for those playstyles to seperate themselves from the Emain action.

How to do this is determined by the current status of the server. On Uthgard, you don't need to do very much to effectively create these conditions. My view on this holds 3 basic changes, however I don't think you actually properly fix the problem without all three of these changes.
- BGs lowered to a cap of maximum lvl 40 3L5 and reformed as stated above.
- Xp in the frontiers spots drastically improved (spawn rate and size).
- Xp bonusses boosted for frontier PvE to be worth the effort (also RvR xp reward boosts to prevent taking away the possibility to xp through RvR).

The BG change is very much needed on Uthgard exactly because of the following reasons. People are starting to forget casual RvR on Uthgard is even possible because they are getting used to not having it, meaning that even with PvE population in OF, a lot of players will just stick to BGs for their portion of casual RvR. Also because it offers a level of RvR that's almost identical to end RvR. Not to mention that besides that, BGs also provide one of the best ways to xp your character because it's a way more entertaining way.
These 3 elements (1. too similar to end RvR, 2. one of the best places to xp and 3. the fact that they have drawn almost the entire casual RvR population to them due to the current flaws) are the reason to remove the upper BGs, but they are also a reason to reform the lower BGs so that for instance the RR cap is harder to reach per BG in order to make levelling in BGs as long as you're not capped even more worthwhile.
AND this is why I think adding an extra bonus to RvR kills above the latest BG cap level is needed to keep that way of levelling viable since after all it's a lot more challenging and entertaining than grinding mobs. The reason it should be higher than in BGs is because you will almost be the underdog in most occasions. Your opponents range from low RR xpers to high RR 50s and you will also not find enemy players that easily as in BGs since the frontiers are just a lot bigger. IF you manage to get a great amount of RvR kills in a short period of time, you definately earned the reward aswell as a leveling character imo.
Of course, boosting the xp per kill is more a detail than a basic requirement for casual RvR, however it will certainly spice it up, just like faster timers, horses, etc do.

It is also VERY important that you make sure to have all these changes cooperate once they are implemented. The biggest mistake would be to implement just one of these bonusses without their counterparts to make it work as a whole. (such as implementing horses in OF without any other measures to cooperate with it) The difference here is though, that altering BGs for instance is a lot more fragile than adding horses, so you really can't afford to only deal with half the solution here.


Most players don't even realise there is a problem, and have a hard time seeing through the cloud of Uthgard reality that is before them. I think this is partially the case with you aswell. Uthgard end RvR is currently sitting in a pit. Ever since most of us have been on Uthgard, there has barely been anything else than digging in even deeper while in fact the escape rope really isn't that hard to see and use to get out.