+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Please Balance Warfronts (Some Ideas)

  1. #1
    Telaran Azlaier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    51

    Default Please Balance Warfronts (Some Ideas)

    Being a guardian, and losing 97% of Warfronts begins to get utterly annoying. In fact, I haven't been in a Warfront in almost two weeks, just because I'm sick of never having a healer, and losing every game. Also, this winner-takes-all mechanic needs to be fixed terribly. (I know in most battlegroups, Guardians win all of the games - on ours it's Defiants)

    One thing I had suggested for World of Warcraft when I played (and horde won basically every battleground that ever existed), is to mix up the different factions in each team. Now, I know this doesn't make much sense in a lore perspective, but most people don't really care about lore when PvPing - especially when the lore means they never win. Also, either fixing healers in PvP so that, rather than the team with the most healers winning, the team with the best players wins (basically, bring the player, not the class), or making sure both teams each have an even amount of healers would both be great balances that don't throw dirt at lore. And, as people have been QQing about for quite a while now, please fix this PuG vs. Premade bullcrap.

    While I know you guys (Trion) have stated multiple times that you're not focusing on PvP right now, but PvE, implementing these simple balances will be a great way to make PvP a little more fair while you balance out and work on PvE content.

    It's just that, at the moment, I find myself getting increasingly bored with the game. My guild has cleared GS, and will be finishing RoS soon (please make PvE more difficult...lol), and so I'm running out of things to entertain myself with. I would love a more balanced Warfront system!

    Sincerely,
    A concerned (and rather annoyed) subscriber.

  2. #2
    Ascendant
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    2,282

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azlaier View Post
    Being a guardian, and losing 97% of Warfronts begins to get utterly annoying.
    Come to Emberlord, Guardians win 97% during primetime.

  3. #3
    Shield of Telara baph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    761

    Default

    Just my personal opinion but I hate that idea. I'm also in a battlegroup where Guardian loses more often than not at lvl 50. Although warfronts are already quite meaningless, this would really just bury them. Imagine on a PvP server.. the assassin who just ganked you while you were fighting mobs is now on your team and you're supposed to heal him? I think it just doesn't work. You might as well remove factions all together then.

  4. #4
    Rift Master Catalysts's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    603

    Default

    It was a bad idea the first time it was posted, and the second time, and it will remain a bad idea.

    Much more simple and easy fix is just expand the server clusters, base the clustering on language and nothing else for the euro's . For the US client just lump them all together, or at most segragate based on pvp/pve server type.

    Trion has stated that they can't do that as I recall someone saying (never saw an officia thread or post on it), which I think is BS, the millions they have raked in from launch sales and subs since release now should provide them more than enough revenue to upgrade infrastructure to incorporate something like this. Hell they could even implament it as an option people could check, Global Que Vs. Local Que, reason to follow.

    Part of the problem with implamenting a "Global" style que is new servers will not be able to compete with old and established ones.
    So Global Que = All servers available to your chosen language preference are lumped into a massive player pool for WF's.
    Local Que = Your static server cluster will be the only set of servers from which to pool WF que's.

    Queing for global you will get faster que times, you will have more WF up time, and a broader range of people from various servers/skill levels joining you on the field both as allies and opponents, and would overall lend to a much more balanced outcome of long term win/loss in pugs. You will be matched with anyone from anywhere, including just your server cluster should that be the first available WF you can get into.

    Queing for Local, means you will only ever have teamates and enemies from your own specific server cluster, and nothing more, you may have longer wait times, but that's the option you chose, which makes sense on new growing servers, mostly for level 50 pvp, since being in a 2 week old server, hitting 50, and jumping into a WF on global could very well mean you just jumped into nothing but R6's from servers that have been going since launch.

    Just my quick and dirty opinion on it, but still, and again, my opinion, I don't like the idea of having both factions lumped into the same WF, maybe you could convince the dev's to make a carebear server, where all the battlegrounds are fought with flowers and rainbows and at the end everyone wins and they all sit down for punch and pie. I want my PvP to have a PvP feel. Also setting pvp up as you describe would lead to a load of drama on servers as you may end up even killing your own guild mates or future group mates, who very well may childishly hold a grudge over it. Granted the drama would be amusing, at first.

    Cheers.

  5. #5
    Telaran Azlaier's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Catalysts View Post
    It was a bad idea the first time it was posted, and the second time, and it will remain a bad idea.

    Much more simple and easy fix is just expand the server clusters, base the clustering on language and nothing else for the euro's . For the US client just lump them all together, or at most segragate based on pvp/pve server type.

    Trion has stated that they can't do that as I recall someone saying (never saw an officia thread or post on it), which I think is BS, the millions they have raked in from launch sales and subs since release now should provide them more than enough revenue to upgrade infrastructure to incorporate something like this. Hell they could even implament it as an option people could check, Global Que Vs. Local Que, reason to follow.

    Part of the problem with implamenting a "Global" style que is new servers will not be able to compete with old and established ones.
    So Global Que = All servers available to your chosen language preference are lumped into a massive player pool for WF's.
    Local Que = Your static server cluster will be the only set of servers from which to pool WF que's.

    Queing for global you will get faster que times, you will have more WF up time, and a broader range of people from various servers/skill levels joining you on the field both as allies and opponents, and would overall lend to a much more balanced outcome of long term win/loss in pugs. You will be matched with anyone from anywhere, including just your server cluster should that be the first available WF you can get into.

    Queing for Local, means you will only ever have teamates and enemies from your own specific server cluster, and nothing more, you may have longer wait times, but that's the option you chose, which makes sense on new growing servers, mostly for level 50 pvp, since being in a 2 week old server, hitting 50, and jumping into a WF on global could very well mean you just jumped into nothing but R6's from servers that have been going since launch.

    Just my quick and dirty opinion on it, but still, and again, my opinion, I don't like the idea of having both factions lumped into the same WF, maybe you could convince the dev's to make a carebear server, where all the battlegrounds are fought with flowers and rainbows and at the end everyone wins and they all sit down for punch and pie. I want my PvP to have a PvP feel. Also setting pvp up as you describe would lead to a load of drama on servers as you may end up even killing your own guild mates or future group mates, who very well may childishly hold a grudge over it. Granted the drama would be amusing, at first.

    Cheers.
    I doubt they will implement a Global Queue feature, as the majority of people seem to prefer to PvP with the same group of people.

  6. #6
    Ascendant
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    1,775

    Default

    It would be better to simply make the battle groups 3-4 times bigger so that you get a nice mix and combine strong guardian dominated bg with defiant dominated ones. I am tired of being killed by player X and crushing player Y... its gotten a bit tired.
    Last edited by solarbear; 04-22-2011 at 02:10 AM.

  7. #7
    General of Telara Tugrath's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    905

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Azlaier View Post
    Also, either fixing healers in PvP so that, rather than the team with the most healers winning, the team with the best players wins (basically, bring the player, not the class)
    Please no, I will never win another warfront.
    Don't mind me, I'm just being an idiot.

    What you did there, I see it.

  8. #8
    Soulwalker
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Perhaps instead of the current system of grouping servers for warfronts they could group players based upon a rating system. I guess you could take into account kills to deaths ratios, lifetime favor, gear level, win loss percentages. You could also have several 'Tiers'. This may be an easy was of somewhat balancing PVP based upon the ability of the player, rather than messing with talents that will effect PVE.

    Cause I enjoyed warfronts early on, where Defiant on my server won about 50 percent.

    ATM i would have won one or two from the previous 20-25 i have entered. Its getting so bad that players just stand around and wait for the quick loss, or leave, only to have new players join and leave, and a few players chucking in the now customary 'omg you guys suck so bad etc' for good measure.

    This would probably be too difficult to impliment, and probably has major flaws that i have overlooked in my frustration. Anyway just a thought

    Oh wait i have already found one flaw, elite players will probably dislike the idea that newbies could gain favor as quickly as them etc.

  9. #9
    Plane Touched Uhtred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    242

    Default

    Heals have nothing to do with WF success rates. It's mechanics. And unlike the OP, here's some data

    http://forums.riftgame.com/showthrea...t!-(Here-s-Why...)

  10. #10
    Soulwalker
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1

    Default Other Considerations and Frustrations

    I agree -- warfronts are terribly one-sided! Maybe in the beginning it was even on gearing and such, but these things snowball because the way it's set up -- winner take all. Once you've lost you can never catch up on gear. I started on a small server and the battle group this server was put with includes a beta defiant dominated server -- at level 50, they average rank 5 in prestige and are considerably geared. The warfront groupings need to be re-worked! Don't put newer servers with beta servers; this does nothing more than guarantee an imbalance.
    The warfront notoriety should be looked at as well-- all I've done is pvp to level my toons and have found that at level 50 I still don't even have the notoriety to purchase a level 35 blue that requires being decorated for x faction. Trion needs to review this terribly! I understand, if you win, you should be rewarded...but if you're going to keep pvp competitive in RIFT (and not one-sided) both sides need equal opportunity to gear up - notoriety granted either needs to be equal or the restrictions for decorated, etc should be removed.
    I love pvp and have many friends that do as well; but we find ourselves incredibly frustrated with the pvp in RIFT. I've been doing the dailies regularly, and all I get is a satchel with a green piece of gear that I can't even use because it's leather or plate and i need chain. Why can't there be a pretty blue in there occasionally? And, furthermore, it'd be nice to be able to equip it! In a nutshell -- I've spent a lot of time in pvp and have absolutely nothing to show for it.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts