Celteen wrote:You should start to think outside your box. I've no problems with the RvR situation at all, but we could have and we need a much more healthy RvR population . 8vs8 doesn't need any goodies at all, but RvR needs some improvement for sure.

You were complaining about 2 things; realm unity and losing 8vs8. NF won't help either of those issues. If you want to discuss something else, then fine. But don't try and say that I need to 'think outside the box' when all I did was quote and respond to your post.

Lasastard wrote:Just for you then, the 'light' version:

Situation then: One large RvR zone with sieging of destructible/upgradable keeps and no true bottlenecks, means of getting directly to the action (no wiping on guards to teleport to different zone) ,a central RvR zone ala Emain + xp spots all over the FZ
Situation now: All RvR action focuses on Emain and is limited to 8vs8 and stealther-gangbang, static and defenseless keeps that only small groups raid for RPs and/or to open DF, no or few xp spots

Not saying NF was perfect, but it had a bit more potential to appeal to a broader audience imho.

You're cute.

There's plenty of good xp spots in the frontiers, Windswept Wraiths, Granite Giants, Fins, etc.

You keep complaining about undefended keeps. How can that be? All you have to do is;
1. Claim keep
2. Go to the keep when it's under attack.
3. Kill stuff
4. Profit

Don't go to AMG if you don't want to die to stealthers. It's almost easier than it sounds.

I see plenty of people still complaining about zergs so clearly it's not only 8vs8 these days.

I am not sure why the destructable walls and towers are such a big deal but you keep mentioning it for some reason.

ThokeGM wrote:

Lasastard wrote:Just for you then, the 'light' version:

Situation then: One large RvR zone with sieging of destructible/upgradable keeps and no true bottlenecks, means of getting directly to the action (no wiping on guards to teleport to different zone) ,a central RvR zone ala Emain + xp spots all over the FZ
Situation now: All RvR action focuses on Emain and is limited to 8vs8 and stealther-gangbang, static and defenseless keeps that only small groups raid for RPs and/or to open DF, no or few xp spots

Not saying NF was perfect, but it had a bit more potential to appeal to a broader audience imho.

You're cute.

There's plenty of good xp spots in the frontiers, Windswept Wraiths, Granite Giants, Fins, etc.

You keep complaining about undefended keeps. How can that be? All you have to do is;
1. Claim keep
2. Go to the keep when it's under attack.
3. Kill stuff
4. Profit

Don't go to AMG if you don't want to die to stealthers. It's almost easier than it sounds.

I see plenty of people still complaining about zergs so clearly it's not only 8vs8 these days.

I am not sure why the destructable walls and towers are such a big deal but you keep mentioning it for some reason.

First, I'd appreciate it if you kept such patronizing, snide comments like your first sentence to your self. Second, it is not about what I (or other players) can and cannot do, but what the current system encourages them to do. Also - and I am starting to repeat myself here but for some reason this is not getting through - keep raids in OF are a lot less interesting then they are in NF. It is quite clear that you have an amazingly narrow view on what is or isn't RvR in DAoC - and that's fine - but it also means that you don't really have anything to contribute to the discussion on how to make RVR more appealing to a wider audience of players.

@ThokeGM

Let's start you off slow, shall we? First of all, do you actually play here, and if so - for how long? Because your posts absolutely REEK of theorycraft.

Secondly: No, a solution to a gameplay design problem is never "Well why don't you just DO/NOT DO it?" This isn't a Nike commercial.

pweet wrote:I dont see which changes you could do which are not custom at all. OF like it is atm is live like from back then. So for improving you can just do a lot of custom changes, then you end up with a custom OF Zone.

There are still plenty of keep/relic related bugs. Also the XP spots in frontiers need improvements. And this is still without customizations.

Lasastard wrote:
First, I'd appreciate it if you kept such patronizing, snide comments like your first sentence to your self.

This is surely a joke considering you made the "Just for you then, the 'light' version". Hypocrisy is AWESOME!

I think the notion that you're trying to make Uthgard appeal to a broader audience is interesting since the majority votes 'Yes' to OF.

Discussion has definitely taken a turn for the worse so I'll be leaving this for now, knowing that OF is here to stay.

Blue wrote:I can tell you that OF was a long term goal of Uthgard same like SI is a long term goal. The voting for OF just made the final decision to switch easier.

2 guys createt about 50 acc to manipulate the vote to of, without them we stayed by nf ...
there was an idea to make an ingame vote, that cant be manipulatetd, so why not do a new right vote than

in most of cases nf was and is better
the list of camping/zerging amg (emain) haters - random df openning haters is long ^^,

nf keeps, port systems, relic system, bonuses, siege materials, lvl spots, bridges, long way for hibs, water-bridges, 6 gates in agramon, working war map and much more was better

nf and old-ra work even good togehther, why dont do it

nayru alrdy wrote, so much ppl wining to get nf, that he depending to do it

ThokeGM are you Disdain again?

pweet wrote:ThokeGM are you Disdain again?

No he is not.

davidoof wrote:nayru alrdy wrote, so much ppl wining to get nf, that he depending to do it

Quote please.

There is no way back to NF as it doesn't fit our server. What we had at the end was a level 50 BG. Before that NF was unplayable and way too large which caused lots of forum whine. Hell I remember it quite good!

So what do you plan to do if the new OF improvements don't work?

Blue wrote:What we had at the end was a level 50 BG.

You say that like its a bad thing. Uthgard's population will never climb past 1k, and OF was designed back when 3k pop servers were the norm.

RvR was much more dynamic with Agramon and NF keeps. How can you deny this?

There are servers that have NF if you want to play in NF so bad. Mythic has them and also Brotherland. I have played in both OF and NF and I prefer OF. Apparently so do many other players since Uthgard has the highest population on Portal.

Most of Uthgard's population is here thanks to NF (which was here much longer than OF). Now please kindly GTFO with telling people where to play or not play.

Nymeros wrote:Most of Uthgard's population is here thanks to NF (which was here much longer than OF). Now please kindly GTFO with telling people where to play or not play.

Wrong. The ramp up in population was with introduction of OF. The falloff because its not complete. You praise NF as when it always was good. You simply forget that this was not the case. For you propably NF = Agramon.

Don't you remember when we had the standard port system that all players QQed about having to run the last way to Agramon? Even after introduction of a horse route for the last part to Agramon it took no end. The only way NF is able to survive on Uthgard is with instant teleports directly to the borders of Agramon => BG. NF does work worse for Uthgards population than OF will do. And we dont speak about a BG solution but live like NF.

Seyha wrote:You say that like its a bad thing. Uthgard's population will never climb past 1k, and OF was designed back when 3k pop servers were the norm.

So was NF never designed for small population. More the opposite is the case.