Ravenwatch PC EU

InvitationNotFound

What is this here?

Tigor

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

What is this here?

That question is suggestive. I will try to answer it anyway.

This thread is about sharing experiences in the campaign and also just a way to present yourself or group you belong to in the most positive way. Because that is sometimes needed as everyday is different. Could you try to speak openly?

Btw: We are still recruiting.

WaywardArgonian

Campaign is super dead as of late. Reds and blues on 1 bar after 10pm.

DTStormfox

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Campaign is super dead as of late. Reds and blues on 1 bar after 10pm.

Yeah, this is probably because ZOS shifted the end of the campaign to the end of the month.

Tigor

Today it was good. Played till 22:00. Ad had still low pop bonus while all alliances had two bars.

WaywardArgonian

Tonight was great before the servers went down. Some fun fights.

Tigor

ZoS did you really need to OP DC at the beginning of Mayhem? To get one down we need 5 again.....

Thraben

Agreed, ZoS should nerf DC -

I suggest banning Bretons from Cyro for their AP exploit. This is overdue.

Tigor

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating. The pact must have done something right in the previous one and gave an example of how to play the game.

The new servers gave alliance stackng a new boost with mayhem. But that was to be expected. For now the ballgroups and tryhards can't give a show. A good incidental of this event.

WaywardArgonian

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating. The pact must have done something right in the previous one and gave an example of how to play the game.

Sure.

Yesterday evening I played for 4 hours and we kept having to port between Nikel and Sejanus/BRK to prevent both factions from pushing us. Most other AD were there too.

Jamie_Aubrey

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating. The pact must have done something right in the previous one and gave an example of how to play the game.

The new servers gave alliance stackng a new boost with mayhem. But that was to be expected. For now the ballgroups and tryhards can't give a show. A good incidental of this event.

Is this before or after after WE log on and move you back to your gates ?

We logged on and EP attacked us as always while DC had your scrolls but you'd rather take BB and of course we log in and an hour later WE hold BOTH your scrolls

Tigor

Jamie_Aubrey wrote: »

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating. The pact must have done something right in the previous one and gave an example of how to play the game.

The new servers gave alliance stackng a new boost with mayhem. But that was to be expected. For now the ballgroups and tryhards can't give a show. A good incidental of this event.

Is this before or after after WE log on and move you back to your gates ?

We logged on and EP attacked us as always while DC had your scrolls but you'd rather take BB and of course we log in and an hour later WE hold BOTH your scrolls

That is not our perception as we yesterday had milestones with combined guild efforts at ford Warden by taking Ghartok and DC emperor depose at Aleswell shortly after, and by giving Chim that was taken from Rayles, to AD while chased by DC. Chim at BB is tactically fitting better.

The EP attacking AD while DC had Chim and Ghartok should be accidents and not be recurring for the campaign. But on the otherhand sometimes it might also be right to have some buffers from AD to prevent losses to AD..

But then still everybody has the free choice of attacking who they want.

Zabagad

You play now for such a long time and still believe in fairy tales like the noobs in zone chat:

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating.

and 1 day later then this:

Tigor wrote: »

But then still everybody has the free choice of attacking who they want.

I'm confused

Tigor

Zabagad wrote: »

You play now for such a long time and still believe in fairy tales like the noobs in zone chat:

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating.

and 1 day later then this:

Tigor wrote: »

But then still everybody has the free choice of attacking who they want.

I'm confused

Keep in mind the campaign is very volatile, not everyone is playing everyday. I write about my observations and don't understand what you are confused about. If there is a green alliance, purple and orange can also exist? I know that is also happening.

WaywardArgonian

Tigor wrote: »

Zabagad wrote: »

You play now for such a long time and still believe in fairy tales like the noobs in zone chat:

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating.

and 1 day later then this:

Tigor wrote: »

But then still everybody has the free choice of attacking who they want.

I'm confused

Keep in mind the campaign is very volatile, not everyone is playing everyday. I write about my observations and don't understand what you are confused about. If there is a green alliance, purple and orange can also exist? I know that is also happening.

So in short, 1 faction getting the short end of the stick from the other 2 factions due to opportunistic and/or tactical reasons is an inherent part of a 3-faction setting and is not indicative of any grand conspiracy between 2 factions.

It's just that when you do it, you understand the reasons and motivations to attack a certain faction. But when it's another faction allegedly doing it to you, you assume they must be cooperating because they are jealous of you or whatever.

Tigor

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Tigor wrote: »

Zabagad wrote: »

You play now for such a long time and still believe in fairy tales like the noobs in zone chat:

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating.

and 1 day later then this:

Tigor wrote: »

But then still everybody has the free choice of attacking who they want.

I'm confused

Keep in mind the campaign is very volatile, not everyone is playing everyday. I write about my observations and don't understand what you are confused about. If there is a green alliance, purple and orange can also exist? I know that is also happening.

So in short, 1 faction getting the short end of the stick from the other 2 factions due to opportunistic and/or tactical reasons is an inherent part of a 3-faction setting and is not indicative of any grand conspiracy between 2 factions.

It's just that when you do it, you understand the reasons and motivations to attack a certain faction. But when it's another faction allegedly doing it to you, you assume they must be cooperating because they are jealous of you or whatever.

Exactly every faction is doing it. Aware or unaware. With three factions there is no escape. What I observe is something different than what the reasons behind it are. I observed a green alliance and when that is written down it will be noticed

WaywardArgonian

Tigor wrote: »

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Tigor wrote: »

Zabagad wrote: »

You play now for such a long time and still believe in fairy tales like the noobs in zone chat:

Tigor wrote: »

New campaign started and green alliance is evidently cooperating.

and 1 day later then this:

Tigor wrote: »

But then still everybody has the free choice of attacking who they want.

I'm confused

Keep in mind the campaign is very volatile, not everyone is playing everyday. I write about my observations and don't understand what you are confused about. If there is a green alliance, purple and orange can also exist? I know that is also happening.

So in short, 1 faction getting the short end of the stick from the other 2 factions due to opportunistic and/or tactical reasons is an inherent part of a 3-faction setting and is not indicative of any grand conspiracy between 2 factions.

It's just that when you do it, you understand the reasons and motivations to attack a certain faction. But when it's another faction allegedly doing it to you, you assume they must be cooperating because they are jealous of you or whatever.

Exactly every faction is doing it. Aware or unaware. With three factions there is no escape. What I observe is something different than what the reasons behind it are. I observed a green alliance and when that is written down it will be noticed

Your line about 'the Pact must've done something right' in order to provoke this implies an underlying motivation that isn't there.

Tigor

Reminder: Fights closer to a keep while defending give more points and passive bonusses. Chasing enemies is then a disadvantage. But some builds/classes provoke this playstyle. Don't loose to much momentum and use more artillery to defend.

Yesterday a 50k tick at chalman. A milestone in the evening.

DTStormfox

Tigor wrote: »

Reminder: Fights closer to a keep while defending give more points and passive bonuses.

It is also more fun to fight nearer objectives because it initiates the siege combat that ZOS intended for PvP. Successfully defending and taking objectives (that is: sieging down walls and doors and taking flags) also is more satisfying after a heavy and long siege and it contributes to the Alliance War effort (score board).

WaywardArgonian

Campaign feels super quiet after Mayhem. Barely any fights to be had tonight.

Tigor

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Campaign feels super quiet after Mayhem. Barely any fights to be had tonight.

If many players are relogging to other alliances then this campaign is full of cheaters. Making this campaign alliance locked is something I would vote for. Too often the balance is shifting and therefore reaching milestones for the loyal players is in danger. To offer possibilities to play with friends alternative measures should be accomplished. Some ideas.

1. Alliance lock
2. Penalty for relogging
3. Bonus for loyalty

WaywardArgonian

Tigor wrote: »

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Campaign feels super quiet after Mayhem. Barely any fights to be had tonight.

If many players are relogging to other alliances then this campaign is full of cheaters. Making this campaign alliance locked is something I would vote for. Too often the balance is shifting and therefore reaching milestones for the loyal players is in danger. To offer possibilities to play with friends alternative measures should be accomplished. Some ideas.

1. Alliance lock
2. Penalty for relogging
3. Bonus for loyalty

The issue is that the faction populations are low collectively, it doesn't have to do with relogging. An alliance lock would at this point probably drive more people away from the campaign and just increase the problem.

Not sure how you figure that swapping alliances is cheating either, because it's not.

But I am curious, what kind of penalty and bonus would you envision for loyalty or a lack thereof?

Tigor

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Tigor wrote: »

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Campaign feels super quiet after Mayhem. Barely any fights to be had tonight.

If many players are relogging to other alliances then this campaign is full of cheaters. Making this campaign alliance locked is something I would vote for. Too often the balance is shifting and therefore reaching milestones for the loyal players is in danger. To offer possibilities to play with friends alternative measures should be accomplished. Some ideas.

1. Alliance lock
2. Penalty for relogging
3. Bonus for loyalty

The issue is that the faction populations are low collectively, it doesn't have to do with relogging. An alliance lock would at this point probably drive more people away from the campaign and just increase the problem.

Not sure how you figure that swapping alliances is cheating either, because it's not.

But I am curious, what kind of penalty and bonus would you envision for loyalty or a lack thereof?

The principle of alliances is being part of the same team. Swapping opportunistically to other factions can be considered as betrayal to team members and treason to the alliance. How could that emphasize collectivity?

Opportunistic behaviour might do more harm than benefit to the game and is demotivating if populations are suddenly swapping without consequences.

1. Penalty for relogging to another alliance: Give less rewards then now, and a waittime of 12 hours.
2. Bonus for loyalty to an alliance: Give more rewards then now.

xMetalheartx

With the current distribution of active players, a loyalty bonus would be the only way for a red player to get anything at all. The other alliances simply lack the players to play PvP at all. In blue, Vodka is gone, RDK is rarely seen, and the king's daggers are also rarely seen. Now and then there are still small groups of a few smallscale guilds on the road. The Bunnies are still running in Yellow. As far as I know, Loki has changed campaigns. I don't know of any other really organised groups. In red, you regularly see the Kingsmen, Decimation Elite, Guerra, the Danish Guild, Tribunal of Light, Schatten Konvent, various Firehearts alliances, North Watch Order and Guard.
If you stop for a moment and look at the player distribution, who do you want to play PvP against in the future? Any attempt at combat is nipped in the bud by numerical superiority. How often have I seen several EP guilds attack a castle and run over everything and everyone like a wave?
So instead of demanding an alliance lock, one should rather ask oneself whether this is the way one wants to play the campaign. I always have to smile when some questers wish for a PvE version of Cyrodiil. But they only have to play for EP...

*Edit* it is 7:50 pm, DC has low pop

Tigor

xMetalheartx wrote: »

With the current distribution of active players, a loyalty bonus would be the only way for a red player to get anything at all. The other alliances simply lack the players to play PvP at all. In blue, Vodka is gone, RDK is rarely seen, and the king's daggers are also rarely seen. Now and then there are still small groups of a few smallscale guilds on the road. The Bunnies are still running in Yellow. As far as I know, Loki has changed campaigns. I don't know of any other really organised groups. In red, you regularly see the Kingsmen, Decimation Elite, Guerra, the Danish Guild, Tribunal of Light, Schatten Konvent, various Firehearts alliances, North Watch Order and Guard.
If you stop for a moment and look at the player distribution, who do you want to play PvP against in the future? Any attempt at combat is nipped in the bud by numerical superiority. How often have I seen several EP guilds attack a castle and run over everything and everyone like a wave?
So instead of demanding an alliance lock, one should rather ask oneself whether this is the way one wants to play the campaign. I always have to smile when some questers wish for a PvE version of Cyrodiil. But they only have to play for EP...

*Edit* it is 7:50 pm, DC has low pop

The current distribution of populations is not optimal, I agree. So why not make loyalty a bit more important? The population bars would be more reliable when impulsive alliance swapping would be discouraged. A soft alliance lock could already give a bit more trust in the populations and prevent unpleasant surprises. Having the idea that players with characters on different alliances need to choose at the start, of lets say 12 hrs, what alliance they want to play, would already lead to a more PvP in Ravenwatch where milestones can be reached. After a while new or old guilds will be seen again. Spying would be reduced and each alliance will have a more pure identity. Then the general trust would make it more attractive as it is now.

WaywardArgonian

You need to realize that not everyone plays Cyrodiil for the same reasons you do. You might want to play the campaign and faction game, but when I play with a ballgroup, we just want challenging, outnumbered fights. Had we been on EP, it would have been very difficult to find such fights, given the large guild presence on that side. So we do not play that faction, which is actually healthy since it is not fun for anyone when a competent ballgroup pushes alongside an entire faction against a 2-bar population.

As long as both this playstyle and yours are allowed within the parameters set by ZOS, there is nothing to say that one is more valid than the other.

I notice many guilds are worried about 'spying' but this is honestly quite a strange preoccupation to have, since factions and guilds tend to go through the same motions each and every session. It is really not hard to predict where an attack will take place next if you have been in Cyrodiil for a while and possess a rudimentary understandings of its tactics.

Faction identity would be nice but that ship has sailed pretty much since One Tamriel, and the fact that ZOS has much more recently introduced things such as faction change tokens as well as faction-specific achievements (encouraging completionists to play multiple factions to get all the rewards), clinging on to that idea will inevitably lead to disappointment. You are entitled to do so, but don't try to impose your very specific vision of what Cyrodiil should be on players who are just trying to have a good time without abiding to your principles.

Tigor

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

You need to realize that not everyone plays Cyrodiil for the same reasons you do. You might want to play the campaign and faction game, but when I play with a ballgroup, we just want challenging, outnumbered fights. Had we been on EP, it would have been very difficult to find such fights, given the large guild presence on that side. So we do not play that faction, which is actually healthy since it is not fun for anyone when a competent ballgroup pushes alongside an entire faction against a 2-bar population.

As long as both this playstyle and yours are allowed within the parameters set by ZOS, there is nothing to say that one is more valid than the other.

I notice many guilds are worried about 'spying' but this is honestly quite a strange preoccupation to have, since factions and guilds tend to go through the same motions each and every session. It is really not hard to predict where an attack will take place next if you have been in Cyrodiil for a while and possess a rudimentary understandings of its tactics.

Faction identity would be nice but that ship has sailed pretty much since One Tamriel, and the fact that ZOS has much more recently introduced things such as faction change tokens as well as faction-specific achievements (encouraging completionists to play multiple factions to get all the rewards), clinging on to that idea will inevitably lead to disappointed. You are entitled to do so, but don't try to impose your very specific vision of what Cyrodiil should be on players who are just trying to have a good time without abiding to your principles.

Pointing fingers is the easy way. I play this game from the start and can tell you that spying is a returning topic in the current setting. You can play ballgroups but farming the population with the highest number is something I can't tolerate. That is too easy. So spying and farming the easy way is something that does not fit in our campaign mentality, as it is boring, and certainly not a challenge from our side. And if I wish to write here, no one can prevent that, as I am just giving my opinion. And that opinion is formed by my own experiences, with the players that I play with and who share their knowledge about Ravenwatch Cyrodiil.

And if EP would really be more popular then try to find the reason why, instead of criticise someone with good ideas. Have a nice day.

WaywardArgonian

Tigor wrote: »

Pointing fingers is the easy way. I play this game from the start and can tell you that spying is a returning topic in the current setting. You can play ballgroups but farming the population with the highest number is something I can't tolerate. That is too easy. So spying and farming the easy way is something that does not fit in our campaign mentality, as it is boring, and certainly not a challenge from our side. And if I wish to write here, no one can prevent that, as I am just giving my opinion. And that opinion is formed by my own experiences, with the players that I play with and who share their knowledge about Ravenwatch Cyrodiil.

And if EP would really be more popular then try to find the reason why, instead of criticise someone with good ideas. Have a nice day.

If it is so easy to farm big alliance stacks then why don't you do it? It requires more skill than just stacking 40 people and running across the map. I know because I've done both.

You seem to perceive spies everywhere because you are inclined to. There are some on AD side who assert the same, but I can confidently say it is rarely, if ever, rooted in reality. There are simply not a lot of players who would enjoy sitting on another faction multiple evenings a week reporting back predictable movements to their own faction. Those who do are usually very blatant about this kind of trolling.

Tigor

WaywardArgonian wrote: »

Tigor wrote: »

Pointing fingers is the easy way. I play this game from the start and can tell you that spying is a returning topic in the current setting. You can play ballgroups but farming the population with the highest number is something I can't tolerate. That is too easy. So spying and farming the easy way is something that does not fit in our campaign mentality, as it is boring, and certainly not a challenge from our side. And if I wish to write here, no one can prevent that, as I am just giving my opinion. And that opinion is formed by my own experiences, with the players that I play with and who share their knowledge about Ravenwatch Cyrodiil.

And if EP would really be more popular then try to find the reason why, instead of criticise someone with good ideas. Have a nice day.

If it is so easy to farm big alliance stacks then why don't you do it? It requires more skill than just stacking 40 people and running across the map. I know because I've done both.

You seem to perceive spies everywhere because you are inclined to. There are some on AD side who assert the same, but I can confidently say it is rarely, if ever, rooted in reality. There are simply not a lot of players who would enjoy sitting on another faction multiple evenings a week reporting back predictable movements to their own faction. Those who do are usually very blatant about this kind of trolling.

Have been playing large scale groups years ago, especially to tackle ballgroups, but after the group size reduction from 24 to 12 ball groups are too strong. Apart from the lag it is not pleasant to end up in a brawl that makes you dizzy by uncontrollable actions.

It is not only that waiting on another alliance can be considered as spying. Swapping alliances because the map asks for it could be classified as the same. How often the map is turning while the populations are still low. That 12hrs lock would make players think twice before they swap, and give the rest of the population that mostly is playing during primetime, on their favorite alliance, a guarantee not to be cheated on.

WaywardArgonian

Tigor wrote: »

Have been playing large scale groups years ago, especially to tackle ballgroups, but after the group size reduction from 24 to 12 ball groups are too strong. Apart from the lag it is not pleasant to end up in a brawl that makes you dizzy by uncontrollable actions.

It is not only that waiting on another alliance can be considered as spying. Swapping alliances because the map asks for it could be classified as the same. How often the map is turning while the populations are still low. That 12hrs lock would make players think twice before they swap, and give the rest of the population that mostly is playing during primetime, on their favorite alliance, a guarantee not to be cheated on.

We are playing on a non-proc server where we do not have all the common tools that ballgroups normally rely on to become OP: Snow-Treaders, Vicious Death, Plaguebreak, Dark Convergence, Rush of Agony, etc. Then Harmony was nerfed/changed a few months ago, which represented a huge hit to the damage of the ballgroups who relied on synergy-nuking (which was most of them). The difference is noticeable since many known ballgroups in RW now lack the damage to wipe large groups and have started building more tanky just to be able to survive getting zerged down.

So really, any claim that ballgroups are now too strong is misplaced. They should be easier to fight than ever.

Group size is not an excuse either. EP guilds coordinate together, so especially during prime time it is very rare to spot them alone. Even a guild like Schatten Konvent, which is in essence a ballgroup, often pushes alongside 1-2 other guilds. The lag excuse has also flown since new servers. So if you find yourself vastly outnumbering a non-proc ballgroup but still getting wiped by them, maybe it is not a matter of this playstyle being 'easier' but about every person in that group putting in a lot of work to compensate for the lack of numbers.