That sounds kinda cool, and I'm glad recovery will be quicker (I sure am tired of soloing the sewers every night!).

However, with fewer and fewer things being tied to city rank, what is the motivation other than realm pride to keep the enemy out of one's city? I think there should be some negative enforcement for losing. I know I've been fighting a whole lot harder to prevent zone locks now that Altdorf is at 1 star because I don't want all that progress lost. I mean, it sucks having your city levelled to the ground, but that's kind of what war is like. Fight for it or lose it.

I'm just wondering what will be the negative penalties for a 1 star city and what the rewards will be for a 5 star city?

---

Liandel wrote:

...

However, with fewer and fewer things being tied to city rank, what is the motivation other than realm pride to keep the enemy out of one's city? I think there should be some negative enforcement for losing. I know I've been fighting a whole lot harder to prevent zone locks now that Altdorf is at 1 star because I don't want all that progress lost. I mean, it sucks having your city levelled to the ground, but that's kind of what war is like. Fight for it or lose it.

I'm just wondering what will be the negative penalties for a 1 star city and what the rewards will be for a 5 star city?

---

That's a sticky wicket, and one I'll leave to the likes of Jeff Skalski or Gersh to address, however with the current state of the community, we felt it was more important to give accessibility of these privledges than to deny them.  There wasn't a good reason that we could use to justify further punishing the defeated realm.

Another quick fix because the previous patch was not done correctly or thoughout in the long run.  Did you guy honestly think the city wouldn't be invaded 24/7?  There is nothing to combat the zerg or help population problems .

I do like the scenarios riekland factory and twisting tower being open when the lakes are locked out.  This still doesn't give a realm anything to do besides AFK the pqs or being forced to do scenarios . .  I have seen dozens of people come back that are already unsubbing AGAIN because the constant city pushes. 

I don't like the fact that no scenarios during stage one of the PQ.  That is a WHOLE HOUR of nothing to do unless you decide to do the city which is BORING because its on farm 24/7.

---

Andy wrote:

---

Liandel wrote:

...

However, with fewer and fewer things being tied to city rank, what is the motivation other than realm pride to keep the enemy out of one's city? I think there should be some negative enforcement for losing. I know I've been fighting a whole lot harder to prevent zone locks now that Altdorf is at 1 star because I don't want all that progress lost. I mean, it sucks having your city levelled to the ground, but that's kind of what war is like. Fight for it or lose it.

I'm just wondering what will be the negative penalties for a 1 star city and what the rewards will be for a 5 star city?

---

 

That's a sticky wicket, and one I'll leave to the likes of Jeff Skalski or Gersh to address, however with the current state of the community, we felt it was more important to give accessibility of these privledges than to deny them.  There wasn't a good reason that we could use to justify further punishing the defeated realm.

---

I guess that's fair. It's just that I personally fight harder to defend something I have stake in. If it ultimately makes no dfference what star a city is, I as a player (not as a character!) don't really feel the same sense of urgency to try and prevent it from happening. Those changes will likely be welcome by most, but for me it feels like easy mode. There's pride in building up one's city to a thriving metropolis, and pleasure in toppling the enemy's capital. If you can't see the damage done, it just feels like another scenario.

Even though I'm Order, I really want to crush my enemy, see them driven before me and hear the lamentations of their women. If the enemy wishes to do the same to me, that's fair as well.

Although I have to say as part of the winning faction I've had no major issues, it's really nice to see that you guys are listening to the feedback and reacting faster than usual here.

Great set of initial changes you cited here, but one things seems to be overlooked (or the post didn't mean to go into such details). What will happen to the successfull stage 1 pq completion taking 30 minutes off the stage 2 timer? That should be halved as well, and maybe it is but I want to make sure that it was considered since it has effects on how long we'll have for the king encounter and stage 2 PQ farming.

---

Liandel wrote: ...Even though I'm Order, I really want to crush my enemy, see them driven before me and hear the lamentations of their women...

---

Conan Approves

---

Neptun wrote:

Although I have to say as part of the winning faction I've had no major issues, it's really nice to see that you guys are listening to the feedback and reacting faster than usual here.

 

Great set of initial changes you cited here, but one things seems to be overlooked (or the post didn't mean to go into such details). What will happen to the successfull stage 1 pq completion taking 30 minutes off the stage 2 timer? That should be halved as well, and maybe it is but I want to make sure that it was considered since it has effects on how long we'll have for the king encounter and stage 2 PQ farming.

---

Again,

This is an initial set of changes. I will however bring this point to the attention of the dev team. 

Those are all good changes.  I look forward to getting some time on my alt's in those scenarios. 

The main issue still remains, population imbalances leading to constant city sieges.  I'm just not sure how Victory Point changes will help when the underdog side cannot leave their warcamp. 

---

Werit wrote:

Those are all good changes.  I look forward to getting some time on my alt's in those scenarios. 

 

The main issue still remains, population imbalances leading to constant city sieges.  I'm just not sure how Victory Point changes will help when the underdog side cannot leave their warcamp. 

Message Edited by Werit on 11-04-2009 07:51 PM

---

/wave Werit

The Underdog system should help alleviate some of this, to give the besieged realm a fighting chance to bring the fight back to their enemy. 

As you've alluded too, Cities were not meant to be sieged as frequently as they are right now. We know this, and it's apparent that many players know this. Internally, we're making the needed steps to address this and will keep the community informed every step of the way, as we have been doing. 

---

Choine wrote:
What about the 15 mins it takes to get the door down? The city will be at 45 mins left and thats hardly fair for the attackers to try and make a huge push!

---

I will have to quote this point.

If you are reducing the time and VP, you might also have to halve the door HP; otherwise, the "free points" the defending side gets before they are invaded will be worth roughly 2X as much as they are now.

Unless, of course, you decide that's part of the plan, I'm just sayin, be aware of it.

I like the looks of the changes (anything that keeps me out of city shorter is approved by me) but I was kind of hoping for something that would just kind of stop city sieges for a duration after one occured, because on Iron Rock we are still going to be constantly pushing Altdorf...but it's a good start. I appreciate the effort and it's nice to see something being done about this constant city madness relatively quickly.

3/5 stars Mythic, 3/5 stars.

While i approve of these changes, mythic needs to be very careful when changing the time frame of the city attack.

Considering it takes 5 minutes for people to assemble outside the city gates and 10 minutes to get the door down.

It would also be nice to see more random things to do in altdorf like attacking the bank for gold or something to do at the docks.

Andy, good to hear these changes being considered and implemented. One issue I brought up on the boards was a gear disparity between the winning and losing sides due to easy warlord pq farming. A few ideas were though of, for example letting crests be upgradable, thread located at:

http://forums.warhammeronline.com/warhammer/board/message?board.id=tier_4&thread.id=28416

And another thread with a detailed explanation of repeatable orvr quests which are unlocked depending on your renown rank which when completed (200 rvr kills) give you an appropriate level crest, as well as other ideas such as buyable rvr weapons (with a renown rank requirement) is located here on the WHA forums:

http://www.warhammeralliance.com/forums/showthread.php?t=315879

If we could possibly get some feedback from these ideas we have thought up it would be great, even if it's a simple, "yes we are aware of your concerns and have submitted this feedback to the appropriate team" it would make alot of us happy that our efforts on improving the game via feedback aren't wasted.

Short Term Changes - Approved

Good changes. Still think a total of four hours is a little excessive on such a regular basis, though hopefully as they say, their underdog plans might alleviate some of this. Great work with the scenarios though, THAT is a good idea.

While I'm glad about the changes. It still doesnt solve the 24/7 attacks. If your realm is the underpopulated one there is still no reason to play once your city is attacked. Yeah, its nice having 1 hour of nothing rather than 2-8 but its still pointless.  Especially if you are not rank 40 yet and hate quest lvling / pq's you are royally pwned and cant lvl.

Sub runs out in a couple days and I might not purchase another time card until a working underdog system is in place. Flame me, do w/e you want I dont care.

Looks like I will be working on my book for awhile T_T

DAOC was, and still is your best Mythic let us hope for a 3rd faction in the WAR expansion

Waaagh!!!

With Captured State reduced to 3 hours how will new guilds attempt to complete the Royal Palace? Im sure if you had it on farm you could do it in 1-2 hours but alot of destruction are only just experiencing the Royal Palace. Maybe after the 3 hour timer (reduced i would assume from opposing faction completing pqs) people inside the instance doesnt get kicked out but has the risk of being invaded by the opposing faction.

Also how will decreasing the lockout timer solve the city issue. Wouldnt it just be attacked more often? It wouldnt actually serve to decrease the amount of time spent in a contested city, just how often people will attack the city.

---

Judea wrote:

 

Also how will decreasing the lockout timer solve the city issue. Wouldnt it just be attacked more often? It wouldnt actually serve to decrease the amount of time spent in a contested city, just how often people will attack the city.

 

---

How? Yes it will happen more frequently, but people will burn out faster too trying to flip zones every time between Altdorf seiges.

---

Dekar wrote:

---

Judea wrote:

 

Also how will decreasing the lockout timer solve the city issue. Wouldnt it just be attacked more often? It wouldnt actually serve to decrease the amount of time spent in a contested city, just how often people will attack the city.

 

---

How? Yes it will happen more frequently, but people will burn out faster too trying to flip zones every time between Altdorf seiges.

---

The people who cant do Royal Palace and Warlord instances will burn out faster. The large guilds and alliances will be pushing the city as fast as they can trying to get back into the instances but maybe im wrong. Time will tell i guess.

Now i kinda wanna let Order get to Stage 2 on my Destro toons just to play Twisting Tower.

 Now only if we could get cross server scenario's would i truely be happy.