Roo Stercogburn
Resident Freddy
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2003
- Messages
- 4,486
PQ grinding for zone locking is dull. Not just a bit tedious. Its up there with wood warping, paint peeling and Radio 5.
I'd like to see the zone mechanics tweaked so these things can help if people really want to do them, but I'd prefer it was based on whether each side bothers to put some effort into defending/attacking.
End game is RvR. Not PQs. Include them on a "To do" list if you (Mythic) must, but don't make them an endless source of incoming victory points when you've done everything else in a zone. If nobody is defending a zone prime time they SHOULD lose the zone.
PQs are nice, but they're not THAT great. I don't want to be grinding them when I want to be crushing the bones of enemies underfoot. Er, disc.
And oddly enough, I think neither does anyone else much. If people want to PvE to victory they play WoW. If people want to kill, crush and destroy enemies as their endgame they'll play Warhammer.
This is Warhammer. I signed on to kill or be killed by enemy players. Ok mostly in my case thats be killed. I'm working on that. Hopefully so are Mythic. Thats not important right now.
I'd rather see the zonelocks based on a mechanic where the number of active players in a zone attacking/defending contributed more and the success of holding those objectives counted for more over time, rather than being (as I believe it is) a set amount of static points. Even if its a slow build at least let us win or lose RvR zones based on controlling RvR objectives. These static points augmented by scenarios, PQs and quests might be fine in theory but I'm watching the comings and goings on our server and really its making the whole game a bit too static.
Regarding scenario effect on zonelocking..I'm not sure. Scenarios for a given zone don't seem to pop up very often on our server so its difficult to say if these are a worthwhile or not so worthwhile contributing factor.
Perhaps of course I'm missing something. T4 endgame RvR is only really starting to kick into gear now, this is very much early days and often on voice comms we're discussing the mechanics of how things work rather than just assigning battle orders.
I think the way it is just now, we'll soon see the zones changing hands during the night when most people are in bed since a couple of groups can get the objectives then grind PQs while at primetime it doesn't take too much to undermine a zone lock effort - the requirement to defend being much less and easier than the requirement to take. I don't mind that its easier to prevent a zone lock, but I think its a little *too* easy to prevent zone captures just now.
So to summarise: downgrade the importance of PQs (and maybe scenarios) and upgrade the importance of holding battlefield objectives and reward defences and assaults with victory points over time, not just a static amount.
I'd like to see the zone mechanics tweaked so these things can help if people really want to do them, but I'd prefer it was based on whether each side bothers to put some effort into defending/attacking.
End game is RvR. Not PQs. Include them on a "To do" list if you (Mythic) must, but don't make them an endless source of incoming victory points when you've done everything else in a zone. If nobody is defending a zone prime time they SHOULD lose the zone.
PQs are nice, but they're not THAT great. I don't want to be grinding them when I want to be crushing the bones of enemies underfoot. Er, disc.
And oddly enough, I think neither does anyone else much. If people want to PvE to victory they play WoW. If people want to kill, crush and destroy enemies as their endgame they'll play Warhammer.
This is Warhammer. I signed on to kill or be killed by enemy players. Ok mostly in my case thats be killed. I'm working on that. Hopefully so are Mythic. Thats not important right now.
I'd rather see the zonelocks based on a mechanic where the number of active players in a zone attacking/defending contributed more and the success of holding those objectives counted for more over time, rather than being (as I believe it is) a set amount of static points. Even if its a slow build at least let us win or lose RvR zones based on controlling RvR objectives. These static points augmented by scenarios, PQs and quests might be fine in theory but I'm watching the comings and goings on our server and really its making the whole game a bit too static.
Regarding scenario effect on zonelocking..I'm not sure. Scenarios for a given zone don't seem to pop up very often on our server so its difficult to say if these are a worthwhile or not so worthwhile contributing factor.
Perhaps of course I'm missing something. T4 endgame RvR is only really starting to kick into gear now, this is very much early days and often on voice comms we're discussing the mechanics of how things work rather than just assigning battle orders.
I think the way it is just now, we'll soon see the zones changing hands during the night when most people are in bed since a couple of groups can get the objectives then grind PQs while at primetime it doesn't take too much to undermine a zone lock effort - the requirement to defend being much less and easier than the requirement to take. I don't mind that its easier to prevent a zone lock, but I think its a little *too* easy to prevent zone captures just now.
So to summarise: downgrade the importance of PQs (and maybe scenarios) and upgrade the importance of holding battlefield objectives and reward defences and assaults with victory points over time, not just a static amount.