This immunity thing has to stop... - Page 7

Pimousse · 03-30-2011, 11:15 PM

Van i agree with you, new system involve more tactic i think. And i want add a thing, new warmater skills (teleport):

Quote:

...numbers become less of a factor than speed ...

trulyem · 03-31-2011, 01:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Envy

Logged on for a few hours once this week. Ignis were camping the road between Aggers save and fort, Syrtis camping Aggers market area. That was the case for the whole session I was online, good luck seeing any offensive with that happening all the live long day. After clearing Syrtis and Ignis we started towards Herbred (had to kill a smaller Syrtis group who were heading back to Agg market on the way), alas Ignis were back camping Agg road/save before we got there.

I don't recall seeing any Syrtis-Ignis war at all while I was online unless the two camping groups bumped into each other while chasing some Alsirian.

Just like in RA except, we play better or we are twice of Alsirians in Horus. This is how NGD wants this game, Alsius cornered in one place and getting harassed all day.

trulyem · 03-31-2011, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VandaMan

In case you haven't taken a close look at this stats page, it says that in the last 30 days the ratio of Alsius taking an enemy fort to enemies taking an Alsius fort is .84. This means that even though Alsius forts have been invulnerable for almost half of the reporting period, they were still captured more often than Alsius captured an enemy fort.

Thats RA. Check your numbers correctly, because thats a false percentage for Horus.

VandaMan · 03-31-2011, 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trulyem

Thats RA. Check your numbers correctly, because thats a false percentage for Horus.

No. That was Horus. Notice the "/horus" in the URL.

trulyem · 03-31-2011, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VandaMan

No. That was Horus. Notice the "/horus" in the URL.

Coming from a random source, I use Regnum War status for real updates.

VandaMan · 03-31-2011, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trulyem

Coming from a random source, I use Regnum War status for real updates.

It's pretty well documented, if you actually care to check it out there's a log of the last 30,000+ fort captures on horus. The data is from Regnum War status. If you really have doubts about it's accuracy talk to Xia. I suspect this is not the case, and you're only questioning it now because you don't like what it says.

trulyem · 03-31-2011, 03:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by VandaMan

It's pretty well documented, if you actually care to check it out there's a log of the last 30,000+ fort captures on horus. The data is from Regnum War status. If you really have doubts about it's accuracy talk to Xia. I suspect this is not the case, and you're only questioning it now because you don't like what it says.

Maybe your right, THAT it way more accurate than the ones made by NGD since NGD really sucks with calculations, MY bad. NGD cant make good accurate numbers for their own game. Silly me.

VandaMan · 03-31-2011, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trulyem

Maybe your right, THAT it way more accurate than the ones made by NGD since NGD really sucks with calculations, MY bad. NGD cant make good accurate numbers for their own game. Silly me.

You have no idea what you're talking about. These number are NGD's numbers. Do you think Xia is sitting in front of his(or her?) computer logged into regnum writing down every fort capture and entering them onto her stats page? It's a script, it uses NGD stats. You sir, are retarded.

Anpu · 03-31-2011, 03:34 PM

RO Status is website which monitors Regnum Online's "War Status" official page and records any fort/gem changes that happened there, displaying results in a more convenient way to see overall happenings (instead of just throwing some numbers). So, what exists on RO Status website is not made up, or manually entered, but picked up from NGD's website and parsed for a better analysis.

bois · 03-31-2011, 03:51 PM

On topic.

The immunity thing is not working out as NGD envisioned. There are many reasons for this. I will not elaborate further as we all know what they are whether we admit to it or not.

First, the forts should be not immune to capture. Rather, the gemless realm should have an instantly upgraded fort to level 2 (maybe 3). They can level it further if they so desire. This would be interim measure until the new structures are delivered. This measure does not do much in real terms but offers (hopefully) a psychological and morale boost to this realm so that they can go more on the offensive footing NGD desires. In addition, this buys a little time so that impending warmasters can teleport their armies around. You can be offensive but still the system gives you a slight advantage on the defensive side. This will provide some pressure release from the market and saves. Grind spots should never be trouble free.

Second, What is the purpose of RP? Further to this , what is the point of -RP? Rather than give negative RP for killing inside the save perimeter, I suggest that :

A. negative XP is given. Only negative XP. Not XP credit then reduction.

B. Kills inside the perimeter do not count toward quest. I would go even further and say that a kill inside the perimeter reduces your quest kill count by 1 for every kill.

Third, I do not agree that the gemless realm should be invulnerable to attack. Rather, I would like to see the strength of the gate increased to maybe 50%-75% of the strength it had before this update. This only applies when you have no gems. This must be so in order for other realms to fulfil their invasion type quests. I can only assume that NGD will add more Warmaster quests like kill the leader so they should adjust it now.

Finally, I think that the approach to loss of gems need adjustment. I have always held the belief that each gem (and holding them) grants the realm certain favours. So, I would not suggest that the realm that stole the gem gain any advantage but that the losing realm suffers some Malus.

To this end I suggest that first, the XP malus wish be abolished. Next, The XP malus is placed on one of the gems of each realm. So, once you have your gem that covers that facet, you suffer no XP malus (10%). If you lose that gem then you suffer the penalty for as long as the gem is lost. This effect applies to players level 45 and above. I suggest that this applies to MOB kills only. Player kills and the resulting XP are not affected. This gem would be the one further inside.
The other gem could be any thing else. It could be for example, increased weapon and equipment repair costs, slight penalty on warmaster quest coin payouts (maybe 5% reduction), reduction in Mob drop frequency etc.
The idea is that only MOB grinding is heavily penalized and not war to any great extent, thereby encouraging more offensive actions.

I strongly believe that the gemless realm must be compelled to be more offensive. I think that offering the options above relieves some of the pressure, increases fun for all sides, provides more options for tactical wars and almost forces the losing realm to either try something on their own or become opportunists and conspire either by act or coincidence.

Regards
Artec

03-31-2011, 03:34 PM	#69
Anpu Count Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,186	RO Status is website which monitors Regnum Online's "War Status" official page and records any fort/gem changes that happened there, displaying results in a more convenient way to see overall happenings (instead of just throwing some numbers). So, what exists on RO Status website is not made up, or manually entered, but picked up from NGD's website and parsed for a better analysis. __________________ Inquisition

03-31-2011, 03:51 PM	#70
bois Count Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Trinidad and Tobago Posts: 1,194	On topic. The immunity thing is not working out as NGD envisioned. There are many reasons for this. I will not elaborate further as we all know what they are whether we admit to it or not. First, the forts should be not immune to capture. Rather, the gemless realm should have an instantly upgraded fort to level 2 (maybe 3). They can level it further if they so desire. This would be interim measure until the new structures are delivered. This measure does not do much in real terms but offers (hopefully) a psychological and morale boost to this realm so that they can go more on the offensive footing NGD desires. In addition, this buys a little time so that impending warmasters can teleport their armies around. You can be offensive but still the system gives you a slight advantage on the defensive side. This will provide some pressure release from the market and saves. Grind spots should never be trouble free. Second, What is the purpose of RP? Further to this , what is the point of -RP? Rather than give negative RP for killing inside the save perimeter, I suggest that : A. negative XP is given. Only negative XP. Not XP credit then reduction. B. Kills inside the perimeter do not count toward quest. I would go even further and say that a kill inside the perimeter reduces your quest kill count by 1 for every kill. Third, I do not agree that the gemless realm should be invulnerable to attack. Rather, I would like to see the strength of the gate increased to maybe 50%-75% of the strength it had before this update. This only applies when you have no gems. This must be so in order for other realms to fulfil their invasion type quests. I can only assume that NGD will add more Warmaster quests like kill the leader so they should adjust it now. Finally, I think that the approach to loss of gems need adjustment. I have always held the belief that each gem (and holding them) grants the realm certain favours. So, I would not suggest that the realm that stole the gem gain any advantage but that the losing realm suffers some Malus. To this end I suggest that first, the XP malus wish be abolished. Next, The XP malus is placed on one of the gems of each realm. So, once you have your gem that covers that facet, you suffer no XP malus (10%). If you lose that gem then you suffer the penalty for as long as the gem is lost. This effect applies to players level 45 and above. I suggest that this applies to MOB kills only. Player kills and the resulting XP are not affected. This gem would be the one further inside. The other gem could be any thing else. It could be for example, increased weapon and equipment repair costs, slight penalty on warmaster quest coin payouts (maybe 5% reduction), reduction in Mob drop frequency etc. The idea is that only MOB grinding is heavily penalized and not war to any great extent, thereby encouraging more offensive actions. I strongly believe that the gemless realm must be compelled to be more offensive. I think that offering the options above relieves some of the pressure, increases fun for all sides, provides more options for tactical wars and almost forces the losing realm to either try something on their own or become opportunists and conspire either by act or coincidence. Regards Artec