ForumConcerns about the announced BG setup.
49 posts
• Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
|
I'd just like to point out a few points on why I believe this is a bad idea for (end)RvR on this server. I'll use Llithium's quote to start off with.
This is why a properly implemented system such as the one I have presented in a former topic would work. There ARE a great deal of leveler farmers on Uthgard. It is the most appealing form of getting RPs as it usually proves high reward with relatively low risk. So, give them the opportunity to persue their satisfaction, while at the same time giving those who do prefer the thrill of the battle over the flash of orange numbers at the end of a kill an incentive to not only go out on primetime. An incentive to RvR when they feel like it, rather than when Emain allows them to. This on itself, the ability to really enjoy actual RvR oustide of the limitations of having a competitive group, will prove highly attractive to every player. You need players as you have described above in order to have sustainable RvR and you need xpers(a basic, solid frontier zone population) in order to have those players go out in search for them. The trick is however to find the right setting for the xpers to be sustainably motivated to go out there. It is in my opinion not possible to have both BGs and a sustainable motivation to head into the frontiers at the same time. Why would a leveler risk going into hostile territory for a reward that has almost no chance of competing with A) the RvR in BGs and B) the XP of BGs. The combination of A and B creates such high gains in RPs, XP and (hopefully) enjoyment that no other (mainly PvE) option will come close unless the character progression rates of the alternatives become so ridiculously high that they surpass the additional enjoyment and RP gain seen in BGs. In other words, I do not see how you can form the frontier zones into something equally attractive to levelers as BGs, simply because BGs on itself are so superior. Now I do not want BG gains to be toned down, it would be far wiser to replace them by an alternative when the time is right. This would provide the best of both worlds, since you'd have the benefit of the certainty of having xpers where you want them and the xpers themselves will have a similarly rewarding followup of the BGs regarding fun and character progression. The question of course is: when should this transition take place and how to make sure it provides an experience worthy of a succession to BGs? When? I believe the BGs should end at 44 at latest and 40 earliest (and start preferably at lvl 15 in order to provide the best leveling experience). Anything between those later levels is fine. Any earlier and there will be an unnecessary grinding gap since levelers below 40ish just don't stand enough of a chance to the frontier violence to make frontier XP attractive enough. Any later and you wont have the reliable frontier population you desperately need to base the entire system on. It is absolutely crucial that the sustained fundamental frontier population is achieved or the entire setup will be in vain and OF (and thus endRvR) will remain a failure... Personally, I find level 44 to be ideal since most tanks will have Slam when they are taking it at level 50 and most other classes will have gathered their basic abilities in order to stand a chance against what lurks the frontiers. I think it's the best compromise between a sustainable population which is capable of at least defending themselves and the prevention of creating a tedious grinding gap as we know now at level 1-30ish. How? Of course, the rework of XP spots, mobs and most preferably the xp bonus setup is mandatory. However, this will only cover the PvE aspect of what BGs provided to the players from (preferably) level 15 to 44. One of the main reasons our current players are turning away from end RvR and thus OF is because there is such an immense gap in character progression between the two zones. Not only is the action slower, it is a lot tougher, a lot more skill, cost and time demanding and thus a lot less attractive. The progression doesn't come anywhere near to what BGs offer. So, in order to narrow the gap between BGs and endgame content (I'm calling it content instead of RvR because at level 44 you will not be PvEing per se if you are in the frontiers), it is important to keep the general availability of character progression high. My suggestion to do so would be to motivate the freshly BG trained players to engage themselves into Realm War, to give them an incentive to, despite their disadvantage in level and ability, to go out and actively search for enemy players to kill. In order to prevent unfair bonusses regarding the existing RvR population I think an increase in XP reward to 20-25x XP per RvR kill in the frontiers would be a great motivation to those under level 50 to go out and actually RvR. This bonus should be at least double as high as it is in the BGs (currently 10x) because not only the enemy strength, but also the frequency of encountering them make it at least double as hard to actually make it worthwhile. In all, this measure sparks the non-50 players to not only enter the frontiers as a resort for pure XP, but as a possible resort for both XP AND RvR, just like the BGs provided them before. It will once again increase the likeliness of zergs as we knew them back in 2002, which makes for a serious addition to that real classic feeling on top of bringing in a large number of currently inexistant RvR players and playstyles. Additionally, by having these players actively search for enemies, RvR zones will also appear a lot more populated, since it's now not only the xper hunter and their hunters that actually RvR, but also the so called xpers themselves will be a lot more likely to actively participate in RvR, and thus feel a lot more present on the scene compared to when they are only present if you search for them. @Staff: I sincerely hope you take these remarks (and any other sensible remarks in reply to this thread) into account when finishing the BG and frontier setup. TL;DR: BGs up to level 49.5 is a bad idea. In defense of truth-to-experience.
|
|
As I have already posted extensively on this subject, I'll just point out one simple thing that the staff seemed to have goten right:
tl;dr: BGs up to level 49.5 is an excellent idea. |
|
Zarkor, I think the point people disagree with you on is that having low level xp groups in the frontiers = better RvR. Even in Agramon, with xp groups packed into one small RvR zone, fighting xp groups in the frontier was at best a distraction. It was a tertiary part of RvR. Something that people did if they couldn't find better inc, or if they wanted easy RPs.
I don't see how feeding RvR groups and stealthers easy RPs will improve end-game RvR.
In other words, you're not going to improve RvR by forcing people to do something they do not enjoy. You will, however, lower the server population.
|
|
As you say yourself they provided the incentive for players who couldn't find better inc, players who didn't have what it takes to fight 'real enemies' to actually go out and find those XPers in the hopes of getting at least some RvR action. Is it not this playstyle, where one can RvR without waiting for the right class or player, without having to worry about RR or optimal spec, that has disappeared since the coming of OF? I for one know that I had a much easier time trying to smallman in NF than I currently have in OF. We are currently missing out on these playstyles and players because they have no incentive to even bother running out of their border keeps because they KNOW they won't find any possible targets. They KNOW they will waste their time trying to enjoy DAoC RvR the way they prefer playing it. The only place left for them are the BGs or DF, grinding guards is just completely retarded since it serves no goal other than RPs, which on themselves aren't any good without actual RvR attached to them. These players KNOW that they will not enjoy OF as much as they'd like to because there is just no fun to it for them or anyone else attempting to adapt their playstyle! The misconception however is that BGs will never be replacable by end RvR to those who currently prefer BGs over end RvR. The current situation is only a result of the mismanaging of the playerbase. Deal with the mismanagement and you will have a viable possibility for these players to rightfully choose, instead of OF not even being an option in the first place due to the circumstances as they are now. Those who do not see this, will always stand by their opinion that lowering the end of the BGs is a bad thing. I can not help but press the fact that by lowering the BGs and taking the other measures I've proposed, you WILL resurrect the possibility to enjoy end RvR for those that are currently locked out. It is a small cost for an infinite gain. A slightly shorter BG experience as a trade-off for the viability of end RvR for casual players which is currently inexistant! Another misconception is that OF can not in any way provide the fun required for these playstyles to exist. Surely, it can't do so now, because as I've said, that's why it's currently simply inexistant. It is only by making this playstyle viable again that this playstyle can and will exist, and not a moment sooner. That is why keeping the current ending of BGs, is an incredibly bad mistake to make. It will completely undermine the incentive for casual players to go out, since what player will in their right mind would trade off solid RvR and character progression for merely decent character progression without a real form of worthwhile RvR and thus RP gain? None. As long as there are BGs at a certain level, there will be no reasonable motivation for players to enter the frontiers at that level unless you reward them with such ridiculous bonuses that the BGs themselves will dry out, which makes having BGs at such a level obsolete anyway. You can not combine both worlds, they are incompatible because no reasonable player will ever chose a harder way of character progression for no apparent reason. So, you have to make a choice. Either you sacrifice the entire aspect of casual endgame RvR (and thus the possibility for these players to enjoy OF) and keep forcing these players and playstyles to BGs, OR you create the opportunity for these players to proceed their playstyle in endgame RvR AFTER they have gone through BGs, putting their character progression on par with players who are managing in end RvR now. Real DAoC RvR shouldn't be appealing only to those who put enough effort and dedication into it. It should be enjoyable to all players and playstyles. If you want a real Classic server, then at least make sure this is a worthy possibility rather than a deep disappointment. In defense of truth-to-experience.
|
|
Yeah... Thing is, this is not what you're advocating. In fact, you're lobbying for the *exact opposite* - what we Jedi call the "removal of alternatives". Understand this, and you will understand the Force. If OF can provide fun, women and great looks it should be able to do so on it's own, especially since NF worked perfectly with the identical BG setup. If it can't, guess who should be getting voted off the island. Here's a hint - it' doesn't end with "grounds". |
|
You start with a quote dealing with the subject of farming levelers - I think both sides only have limited fun in this unfair fight.
After that you want to create such a scenario by deleting the BGs. Wouldn't this make it worse? Beside for these guys who want easy rps with no challenge but I think it's only a minority. BGs have the advantage that: - you don't need the perfect group to gain rps/level - you run at same RR - you have a small area Maybe from the point of view of a level 50 it would be great to have more enemies in RvR but as a leveler you would be thankful to have an opportunity to get some rr and have fun in BGs before you get 50 and have to run against the high rr players. Uthgard till 2003!
|
|
The reason to remove the alternative of BGs over frontiers at 44+ is the fact that BGs are simply superior to frontiers unless frontiers wield a ridiculous bonus, which I've explained above. That is why removing the latest BG will increase frontier population IMMENSELY, making the fundaments on which the improvement of endRvR stands basicly DOUBLE in strength. Now this is important because the success of the entire system relies on these fundaments. The more players in the zones, the more incentive for others to go there and the more likely the casual player will be able to enjoy their playstyle, THUS the more likely the casual player will stick to end RvR rather than re-rolling to BGs. So, the better you accomodate the basic frontier population, the more it will enable players to enjoy the frontiers and thus the more players will stay there. That is why I'm so vividly in favor of removing the last BG, to make the system work optimally, rather than as a side-project, which will only make it fail anyway because it needs full support. I rather have 100 more active players into end RvR than maybe 30 while keeping the last BG in return... What (new) end RvR player will care about a BG less or more if they can (finally) enjoy their character to the full extent on a regular basis?
The changes I am advocating are not bound to a certain map. OF or NF, it would work for both since it's based on the setting, rather than the map. Sure, NF worked to an extent with merely decent XP spots and I'm sure, in OF it will work similarly, but it will not have the success it could have when the setting is fully optimalised towards end RvR. Every additional player that sticks to end RvR is a player that will be another incentive to those who come after him, thus being more valuable than merely his presence in end RvR. If you still believe that having the last BG over a setting that is orientated towards optimalising end RvR is simply better for this server then I'm afraid our opinions differ too much for discussion to be of any further use. In defense of truth-to-experience.
|
|
i 100% agree zarkor. The level spots in NF where the only good thing with NF for me. We leveld a lot in the frontier, and besides being ganked by FG's we also had nice fights aginst weak grps and stealthers that where really fun. The level bonus in frontier should be raised to at least 50% and the last BG end at 44.
Last edited by holsten-knight on Dec 27, 2010 18:41, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
I'm only advocating the removal of 1 BG, the latest one. I don't think a minority likes easy rps with no challenge, it is most likely the minority that likes hard rps with lots of challenge. In fact, most of these players are the players in end RvR because this kind of RPs is pretty much the only kind to be made in end RvR as it stands now. The majority of new players who end up in End RvR do not establish themselves within the current endgame population for them to really enjoy their time spent in end RvR, thus they go back to BGs for obvious reasons. Maybe not so much because they don't want to work for their RPs, but simply because BG RPs are so much more easier and thus more fun. Why do you think that when there's an organised zerg event, there are so many new faces? Because they don't have to bother about the setup, they don't have to bother about optimising their playstyle and teamplay, they can just do what they are used to doing in BGs, but this time on an epic scale, at level 50, without having to think "ah pff damn all the RPs I make are going to waste when I reroll anyway". Zergs on live are a good example aswell. There was always more people in zergs than there were running around in organised 8mans. (allthough, DAoC has evolved of course)
You will HAVE this opportunity, from level 15 to 44 you can enjoy BGs, built up RR and learn to master your character as much as you like. Surely, this would be even more opportunity to do so compared to what we have now. On the other hand, yes, you would have to deal with high RR players occasionally, but if properly implemented (remove last BG + xp revamp + 20-25x XP reward per RvR kill), there should be a very reasonable amount of likeminded enemy players for you to fight aswell. Frontiers will be the final BG, with the danger of high RRs around, sure, but what's stopping you from building a grp as you would do in Thidranki to counter them? The thing is, with the last BG in place, this on itself would be stopping you already. Sure, 20-25x XP bonus for an RvR kill in the frontiers is nice, but is it worth the risk? Is it really better than just staying in the 'safety' and certainty of the last BG? Most will say it's not, and for good reason. This will also demotivate the players that do want to test their skills where it really matter, because they will have a hard time finding likeminded players, thus completely undermining the increase of potential fresh endRvR participants. Like I said, I prefer having 100 more potential end RvR players than 30 more potential end RvR players while keeping the last BG intact. After all, shouldn't BGs be more a pre-taste of end RvR, rather than an actual alternative? In defense of truth-to-experience.
|
|
You make valid points even if I don't believe the influx of people will as big as you make it out to be.
A much easier option is NF though. We had thid aswell back then and still a lot of people xp'ed in Agra/Emain/HW/Odins. Towers for small groups, keeps that were better and more fun, more options for soloers and fg. Just flogging a dead horse here. |
|
Zarkor you are completely missing the point here on at least two fronts.
Let's say the last BG is removed: Even if ONE single person decides to go to endgame RvR instead, your predictions will prove true in the sense that endgame RvR has been boosted. And I for one believe at least some people will indeed pass over, and in that sense I agree with you. However: 1.) You fail to take into account the number of people who simply WON'T go to endgame RvR, and will either leave the server alltogether or phase out into the PvE population completely (with the occasional foray into DF). After all, endgame RvR has been here for years. It's not like people CAN'T participate, they just choose not to. Instead of flaunting the gain in endgame RvR (which will undeniably happen, to a degree), you should also include the *guaranteed* loss in server population or other kinds of RvR. I strongly suspect that the end result would be a negative number. 2.) The second major issue is the issue of PRINICPLE. It's just wrong to force people to play a certain way and remove all alternatives because one particular system is flawed and can't handle normal behavior. The principle of the thing is just plain wrong, and actions like that should always be objected to. Try thinking in terms of incentives instead of what is, frankly - coercion. |
|
This! This perfectly illustrates why adding better XP spots will not help end-game RvR on Uthgard. There is no Agramon in OF. OF is not NF. XP leveling in Agramon worked because it was the perfect balance of risk vs. reward. Porting into Agramon was quick, your group was buffed and ready to move before you arrived, and the zone was so small that there was a lot of friendly inc to help you with adds and XP gankers. You could literally step outside the portal tower and start leveling. If you were ganked, so what? It's not like you wasted much time sitting on a POINTLESS pad waiting to zone. Here is what XP leveling in OF will look like: 1. Wait on the pad for 8 minutes 2. Port in, wait 8 more minutes because the healer missed the port 3. Buff up, wait for people to return from afk 4. Run for 5 minutes to the mile-gate 5. Arrive at the mile-gate 6. Get fŭcked 7. Go to step 1 or, option 2: 1. Buff up and leave your realm's home keep 2. Find a nice spot in your own frontier, far from the RvR spots 3. Level up normally, with little or no interruption from enemy players 4. Contribute nothing to end-game RvR That is what the OF design allows for. That is why things that worked for NF (like real keep sieges and realm defense) do not work in OF.
|
|
Indeed I haven't mentioned this in my thread here, that is true. I have however posted it in my old thread but I don't want to bother anyone to go read that stuff again. In any case, I definately admit there will be a fair amount of players that will stick to BGs regardless, or simply leave the server. But... That is the case now already, people are quitting this server and re-rolling toons even more so than they did back with NF and for good reason. Casual RvR has died out, which is a very nasty loss for this server as it only widens the gap between the hardmode end RvR players that are left and the more casual players that now have the choice to either go hardmode, go BGs or simple go away once they hit 50. To be quite honest it can't really get much worse than it is now. Sure, any change is likely to be a good one in that prospect but why not do it thoroughly proper instead? Wouldn't that be a good idea? Currently I'd estimate at least about half of the people that are roaming BGs as their primary RvR zone would roam the frontiers instead if they were given a decent chance to do so in the way they like to RvR. However you have to keep this in thoughts as a long-term solution, rather than an instant fix. There are no instant fixes to the problem we are facing. A lot of the players who will make the effects of these changes seen are the ones who just hit 44 and capped that last BG. They are the ones to convince the most with an eye on a long-term solution. So, on top of say half of the players that currently resort to BGs for RvR, you'd also gain the players that now simply quit Uthgard after realising how bad the current end RvR situation really is. The longer this change is in place, the more players you keep. If this server had its end RvR just little bit better organised I'm sure we wouldn't still be sitting at around 800 players, but rather benefitted greatly from the 1k we once had and built on from there, instead of declining again to where we are today because a good RvR experience makes for the best publicity. Of course the RA setting and all the known bugs and flaws have to do with this as well, though the actual RvR situation is one of the biggest factors nonetheless. So, yes, there will always be players that prefer BG RvR, there's no doubt about that, however on the long term I definately believe my proposed fixes will prove to be more effective than any other proposed change I have read so far, because it is so fundamentally structured, rather than being a plaster on a gaping wound.
Removing all alternatives was never relevant to be honest. Yes, the possibility for BG RvR will end sooner, true, but it sure won't end in general. It will even get more accessible if anything. About it "being just plain wrong" I have to disagree. Let's talk NF and Agra and such. Sure, it was better than OF, but in the end, the frontier RvR population never really felt like it was as high as it should or could be. There was a reason why we changed to OF after numerous of attempts to 'fix' NF. OF as we know it now just sucks even more. I think optimising the amount of people participating in end RvR is probably one of the best goals a DAoC server could have, since it focuses on making it enjoyable in a way that as many players as possible are willing to spend their time on the best aspect of this game, which happens to be the best game to experience that aspect... The game settings will always be the guidelines which a player will have to follow. There is no way around it and if the setting, like the current one, is discouraging a relatively large amount of players on a regular bases to participate in end RvR I believe action is justified in order to change this trend into a more positive one. The fact that one playstyle is shifted by just the slightest margin is of hardly any significance if you take into account the greater scheme of things, more specificly the revivication of casual end RvR. I see it as a way of shifting the public opinion and game experience by using the game setting to achieve a goal that in the end will be more beneficial than anything. You said you believe otherwise, then I guess we disagree... I could also turn your argument around you know. Imagine there would be no BG at levels 35+ and people were actually used to going out in the frontiers with 'retarded' setups and groups with level 40s in them, I could easily destroy this by implementing BGs, since this would effectively take away the motivation of the players under 50 to still go out in the frontiers, rather than the BGs. The blade cuts on both sides and I don't think that because we have the current system installed on Uthgard that it should be untouchable, merely because players like you seem to be afraid of 'being forced' into the frontiers, while I could claim we are 'being forced' into BGs, which is actually true to an extent. The thing is, being forced into BGs isn't really doing any good towards the endRvR population, whereas pushing the BGs back slightly could actually do wonders compared to the current situation. In all, I'd say it's AT LEAST worth the attempt.. In defense of truth-to-experience.
|
|
You said a lot of thing, and this is the worst. Before High RR group (not only guild group also well known PUG) should group other player to teach them how to play; they don't do it, if they do it we could also try but with the current behaviour of everyone on the stable rvr population you can't do that. Everything you said has a major flaw, the people that already are on rvr doesn't want anyone that doesn't know how to play well his char and know how to play with stranger. The first improvment you need zarkor is on people that are playing rvr today, after with more open minded rvr population you could improve more thing. don´t let yourself fool from Old RA´s and people
who say they will be good for the server. they are NO solution.. SAY NO TO OLD RA´s!! SAY NO TO 1.69!! do NOT support that obviously wrong way in any way!! (source Musikus)
|
|
...  It will never work like that, ever. It didn't do so on live in 2002 and it won't do so here. Blaming the community is so easy, but it doesn't solve anything. In defense of truth-to-experience.
|
49 posts
• Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests