Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

defending is easier and it's logical to give lower ap.

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

How about killing the attackers? Not rewarding enough? Isn't pvp meant for fighting?

I don't know about you - but I do kill attackers when defending a keep. It's not mutually exclusive. (sorry that sounded snarkier than I intended)

All I'm saying is they need to stop making defense less attractive.

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

How about killing the attackers? Not rewarding enough? Isn't pvp meant for fighting?

I don't know about you - but I do kill attackers when defending a keep. It's not mutually exclusive. (sorry that sounded snarkier than I intended)

My question was if it isn't enough rewarding just killing the enemies as you wrote it will be worthless defending a keep without it, which isn't the case. Again, it is the goal of PvP (AvA), right? So why do you think you need a 5-7 time multiplier? It would simply be enough just getting a little bit more (if at all, but that's another discussion - it should just align with offensive ticks, which it doesn't).

You can have your fights theoretically all across the map, yet those ticks reduce it very often just to 1 keep that's getting defended by the whole faction.

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

How about killing the attackers? Not rewarding enough? Isn't pvp meant for fighting?

I don't know about you - but I do kill attackers when defending a keep. It's not mutually exclusive. (sorry that sounded snarkier than I intended)

My question was if it isn't enough rewarding just killing the enemies as you wrote it will be worthless defending a keep without it, which isn't the case. Again, it is the goal of PvP (AvA), right? So why do you think you need a 5-7 time multiplier? It would simply be enough just getting a little bit more (if at all, but that's another discussion - it should just align with offensive ticks, which it doesn't).

Maybe not 5-7x (again, I must be playing wrong I never got that much!) but I would rather the scoring err on the side of more AP rather than making keep defense tick less AP than you'd get for mindlessly flipping a resource or town against NPCs. What that magic formula should be I don't know - but I do think that this change with the resources is a mistake - it's not going to change the gameplay in the way I think they are expecting it to.

I think where we might be getting hung up is where I said "zero incentive". I was speaking in general - not meaning it had zero incentive for me - but as someone said players follow the AP and if the defense AP isn't that great, they won't bother.

Well, it will reduce the ticks in all likelihood, which is a good thing. It might be too harsh and it still doesn't prevent exploitation. But i prefer reduced def ticks in comparison to what it was.

Just an example tick (this wasn't during the AP event, it was closely after the Summerset release):


It was an insanely high tick for the amount spent there. Anyway, I do not know the exact number of the multiplicator and as far as I heard it depends on the type of fight (2way vs 3way). Somewhere in the forums I've read about a 7x multiplicator. I'm not sure if that's correct, but x5 should be possible at a level 5 resource or keep. And that is my problem with all of this. I do not see a reason why I should get that much more AP. I probably would be fine if they had doubled it. But the current amount is just ridiculous.

Offense and Defense Ticks should be balanced such as that both are worth going for. Yet, when one wants to get AP and have to attack an enemy level 5 keep or would have to defend a level 5 keep (respectively level 2 now), for most players in most cases the defense would make sense, which exactly leads to faction stacking on that keep. Which is exactly what ZOS didn't recommend and leads to a huge zerging.

But I guess our opinions differ here.

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

It was an insanely high tick for the amount spent there.

Yeah that is crazy high - I think the biggest (non-event) I ever saw was 15k, so that's probably why it didn't seem all that OP to me!

TequilaFire wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 plus ap to reach max AR rank so ap rewards should be scaled to match as that shouldn't take longer than the lifetime of the game.

There are plenty of AR 50 players around (even without role playing).

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

How about killing the attackers? Not rewarding enough? Isn't pvp meant for fighting?

I don't know about you - but I do kill attackers when defending a keep. It's not mutually exclusive. (sorry that sounded snarkier than I intended)

My question was if it isn't enough rewarding just killing the enemies as you wrote it will be worthless defending a keep without it, which isn't the case. Again, it is the goal of PvP (AvA), right? So why do you think you need a 5-7 time multiplier? It would simply be enough just getting a little bit more (if at all, but that's another discussion - it should just align with offensive ticks, which it doesn't).

Maybe not 5-7x (again, I must be playing wrong I never got that much!) but I would rather the scoring err on the side of more AP rather than making keep defense tick less AP than you'd get for mindlessly flipping a resource or town against NPCs. What that magic formula should be I don't know - but I do think that this change with the resources is a mistake - it's not going to change the gameplay in the way I think they are expecting it to.

I think where we might be getting hung up is where I said "zero incentive". I was speaking in general - not meaning it had zero incentive for me - but as someone said players follow the AP and if the defense AP isn't that great, they won't bother.

Well, it will reduce the ticks in all likelihood, which is a good thing. It might be too harsh and it still doesn't prevent exploitation. But i prefer reduced def ticks in comparison to what it was.

Just an example tick (this wasn't during the AP event, it was closely after the Summerset release):


It was an insanely high tick for the amount spent there. Anyway, I do not know the exact number of the multiplicator and as far as I heard it depends on the type of fight (2way vs 3way). Somewhere in the forums I've read about a 7x multiplicator. I'm not sure if that's correct, but x5 should be possible at a level 5 resource or keep. And that is my problem with all of this. I do not see a reason why I should get that much more AP. I probably would be fine if they had doubled it. But the current amount is just ridiculous.

Offense and Defense Ticks should be balanced such as that both are worth going for. Yet, when one wants to get AP and have to attack an enemy level 5 keep or would have to defend a level 5 keep (respectively level 2 now), for most players in most cases the defense would make sense, which exactly leads to faction stacking on that keep. Which is exactly what ZOS didn't recommend and leads to a huge zerging.

But I guess our opinions differ here.

The only way you get big defensive tics (pre-wolfhunter) when you are faction stacking a keep is if the enemy force is huge and the fight lasts a while. So at that point, the enemy is already zerging your keep. What do you expect defenders to do if it is a home keep? Just roll over and not send more people to defend because oh no, we don't want to faction stack our keep that is being zerged.

If the enemy force is like 20 people and you are faction stacking the keep for defense, whoopdee doo, you just got a 400AP tick when you wipe them. If the enemy is 50+, you either have to stack defenders or lose the keep. And if that 50+ grows and the fight takes an hour, why shouldn't you be rewarded well for the defense? In that same hour, you could have probably taken 6 undefended keeps and lost all of your home keeps in the process to the zerg. Good job.

This is not correct. There is no need for zerging to get huge ticks.
E.g. if you are alone and kill 5 guys => ~10k for the kills, 50k+ for the tick. (If you attack a keep it would get you 16k against the 5 guys (including the offence tick). Do you think risk / reward is balanced between offence / defense? I don't think so).

If a fight takes longer and there are plenty of enemies you would get decent AP anyway. I'd have been absolutely fine with getting a 15-30k tick instead of the 120k in the screenshot for the fight we had there. There was plenty of AP in the fight anyway.

And that is exactly the issue with these high ticks, it attracts everyone and it doesn't matter if the people are needed or not. Zerging is what the result is.

jaws343 wrote: »

As long as you are within the area of the keep, that includes resources, and you kill someone or heal someone or contribute to the fight, you get the tick. So yes, defending resources counts.

From what I observed, this is incorrect. If you kill or heal someone at a resource, while the keep is under attack, you get a defensive tick for defending the resource, but you don't get any AP for the keep defense, unless you also kill / heal someone in the direct vicinity of the keep (the area between the resource area and the keep).

Cheers,
Don

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

TequilaFire wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 plus ap to reach max AR rank so ap rewards should be scaled to match as that shouldn't take longer than the lifetime of the game.

There are plenty of AR 50 players around (even without role playing).

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

How about killing the attackers? Not rewarding enough? Isn't pvp meant for fighting?

I don't know about you - but I do kill attackers when defending a keep. It's not mutually exclusive. (sorry that sounded snarkier than I intended)

My question was if it isn't enough rewarding just killing the enemies as you wrote it will be worthless defending a keep without it, which isn't the case. Again, it is the goal of PvP (AvA), right? So why do you think you need a 5-7 time multiplier? It would simply be enough just getting a little bit more (if at all, but that's another discussion - it should just align with offensive ticks, which it doesn't).

Maybe not 5-7x (again, I must be playing wrong I never got that much!) but I would rather the scoring err on the side of more AP rather than making keep defense tick less AP than you'd get for mindlessly flipping a resource or town against NPCs. What that magic formula should be I don't know - but I do think that this change with the resources is a mistake - it's not going to change the gameplay in the way I think they are expecting it to.

I think where we might be getting hung up is where I said "zero incentive". I was speaking in general - not meaning it had zero incentive for me - but as someone said players follow the AP and if the defense AP isn't that great, they won't bother.

Well, it will reduce the ticks in all likelihood, which is a good thing. It might be too harsh and it still doesn't prevent exploitation. But i prefer reduced def ticks in comparison to what it was.

Just an example tick (this wasn't during the AP event, it was closely after the Summerset release):


It was an insanely high tick for the amount spent there. Anyway, I do not know the exact number of the multiplicator and as far as I heard it depends on the type of fight (2way vs 3way). Somewhere in the forums I've read about a 7x multiplicator. I'm not sure if that's correct, but x5 should be possible at a level 5 resource or keep. And that is my problem with all of this. I do not see a reason why I should get that much more AP. I probably would be fine if they had doubled it. But the current amount is just ridiculous.

Offense and Defense Ticks should be balanced such as that both are worth going for. Yet, when one wants to get AP and have to attack an enemy level 5 keep or would have to defend a level 5 keep (respectively level 2 now), for most players in most cases the defense would make sense, which exactly leads to faction stacking on that keep. Which is exactly what ZOS didn't recommend and leads to a huge zerging.

But I guess our opinions differ here.

The only way you get big defensive tics (pre-wolfhunter) when you are faction stacking a keep is if the enemy force is huge and the fight lasts a while. So at that point, the enemy is already zerging your keep. What do you expect defenders to do if it is a home keep? Just roll over and not send more people to defend because oh no, we don't want to faction stack our keep that is being zerged.

If the enemy force is like 20 people and you are faction stacking the keep for defense, whoopdee doo, you just got a 400AP tick when you wipe them. If the enemy is 50+, you either have to stack defenders or lose the keep. And if that 50+ grows and the fight takes an hour, why shouldn't you be rewarded well for the defense? In that same hour, you could have probably taken 6 undefended keeps and lost all of your home keeps in the process to the zerg. Good job.

This is not correct. There is no need for zerging to get huge ticks.
E.g. if you are alone and kill 5 guys => ~10k for the kills, 50k+ for the tick. (If you attack a keep it would get you 16k against the 5 guys (including the offence tick). Do you think risk / reward is balanced between offence / defense? I don't think so).

If a fight takes longer and there are plenty of enemies you would get decent AP anyway. I'd have been absolutely fine with getting a 15-30k tick instead of the 120k in the screenshot for the fight we had there. There was plenty of AP in the fight anyway.

And that is exactly the issue with these high ticks, it attracts everyone and it doesn't matter if the people are needed or not. Zerging is what the result is.

You are trying to say that zerging and faction stacking is only happening because of the defensive ticks. You are wrong. That was happening pre-summerset anyways. The only difference was, unless it was an emp keep or a home keep, no-one defended anything. At least now, players are defending keeps all over the map. It isn't the defenders fault that the zerg decides it must have Chalman or BRK. And my point was to show that faction stacking a keep that is not being hit with a large force results in very little AP, because a smaller tic is spread out among more players.

In your example, what most likely happened is you were the only player there (or one of a few) to get the tick. If the keep was faction stacked, as you claim is what is happening, your tick would have been like 2K AP or more likely less. The 100K or even 50K+ ticks are not the normal ticks, they are outliers. You cannot burn the whole system to the ground because of outliers. Most faction stacked ticks from fights that are over quickly are around 4K. And the ones that last 30M+ sit around 20-30K AP. Those are all reasonable numbers.

I have no idea how people come up with such low ticks. Playing on low level campaigns where ap gain is reduced?

Certainly, def ticks aren't the only reason for zerging. Yet, they encourage it. Regarding the keep defense you mentioned, idk, but that might be platform / campaign specific. I still don't see many keeps under siege at the same time. Usually I see one keep that gets all defenders.

If you refer to the 120k tick in the screenshot? No, there were many players around. Our group had approximately 10 players and there were like 25-40 others around.
I guess your numbers are quite off a bit.

Let's make a few examples and compare offense vs defense:

Example #1: AD fights EP. AD has 40 players, EP has 20 players. In this example AD will win.
In total 40 players die (20 AD and 20 EP). If they all give full AP this means that 80k AP are generated. 40k going to AD, 40k going to EP.
Now on the offense: The 40 players are going to take the keep and get 6k for winning 2k for the action (80k / 40 players). So the tick will be 8k and depending on who killed whom and so on some additional AP, but we are looking at ticks now, right?
Now on the defense (level 5): The defense tick will be around 10k each of the 40 players (2k each multiplied with the multiplicand (x5))

Example #2: AD fights again EP. AD has 50 players and EP has 50 players.
All of them wipe once in our example, which will generate 200k AP (2k each player).
On the offense: 6k for taking the keep + 4k (200k / 50 players) => 10k offense tick.
On the defense: 20k defense tick (200k / 50 players * multiplicand)

Example #3: Now lets say it is a long battle again with 50 players on each side. 500k AP will be generated.
On the Offense: 6k for taking the keep + 10k (500k / 50 players) = 16k
On the Defense: 50k defense tick (500k / 50 players * multiplicand)

And so on. And here you see the issue I'm trying to describe. In your 2-4k examples you were either on a low level campaign, defending a low level keep or zerging down a handful of players with the whole faction. Otherwise these low numbers aren't possible.

Furthermore you see that a defense can give a huge amount of AP very fast. In all the examples the defense could be over very fast (doesn't have to, but it is possible). Yet a successful offense often take longer. So you don't even have the time aspect in the calculations above.

The ticks simply were ridiculous. Nothing else. And again, don't get me wrong, pre-summerset def ticks weren't that great and buffing them is okay, but not in the way the did. Offense and defense ticks should align more.

TequilaFire wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

TequilaFire wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 plus ap to reach max AR rank so ap rewards should be scaled to match as that shouldn't take longer than the lifetime of the game.

There are plenty of AR 50 players around (even without role playing).

There didn't use to be as ap rewards were set too low, most have no desire to return to that.
Your extreme examples are just that extreme and double ap isn't in effect but once a year.
Now if you had to walk 20 miles back in the day, oh well...

All examples were without double AP including the screenshot. These examples (including the examples above) aren't extreme. They are quite common.

AP got already buffed before summerset, which was okay (implementation and role playing wasn't). Yet I even agree that buffing def ticks in general is okay, but not in this way.

Edit: Typo

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

TequilaFire wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 plus ap to reach max AR rank so ap rewards should be scaled to match as that shouldn't take longer than the lifetime of the game.

There are plenty of AR 50 players around (even without role playing).

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

How about killing the attackers? Not rewarding enough? Isn't pvp meant for fighting?

I don't know about you - but I do kill attackers when defending a keep. It's not mutually exclusive. (sorry that sounded snarkier than I intended)

My question was if it isn't enough rewarding just killing the enemies as you wrote it will be worthless defending a keep without it, which isn't the case. Again, it is the goal of PvP (AvA), right? So why do you think you need a 5-7 time multiplier? It would simply be enough just getting a little bit more (if at all, but that's another discussion - it should just align with offensive ticks, which it doesn't).

Maybe not 5-7x (again, I must be playing wrong I never got that much!) but I would rather the scoring err on the side of more AP rather than making keep defense tick less AP than you'd get for mindlessly flipping a resource or town against NPCs. What that magic formula should be I don't know - but I do think that this change with the resources is a mistake - it's not going to change the gameplay in the way I think they are expecting it to.

I think where we might be getting hung up is where I said "zero incentive". I was speaking in general - not meaning it had zero incentive for me - but as someone said players follow the AP and if the defense AP isn't that great, they won't bother.

Well, it will reduce the ticks in all likelihood, which is a good thing. It might be too harsh and it still doesn't prevent exploitation. But i prefer reduced def ticks in comparison to what it was.

Just an example tick (this wasn't during the AP event, it was closely after the Summerset release):


It was an insanely high tick for the amount spent there. Anyway, I do not know the exact number of the multiplicator and as far as I heard it depends on the type of fight (2way vs 3way). Somewhere in the forums I've read about a 7x multiplicator. I'm not sure if that's correct, but x5 should be possible at a level 5 resource or keep. And that is my problem with all of this. I do not see a reason why I should get that much more AP. I probably would be fine if they had doubled it. But the current amount is just ridiculous.

Offense and Defense Ticks should be balanced such as that both are worth going for. Yet, when one wants to get AP and have to attack an enemy level 5 keep or would have to defend a level 5 keep (respectively level 2 now), for most players in most cases the defense would make sense, which exactly leads to faction stacking on that keep. Which is exactly what ZOS didn't recommend and leads to a huge zerging.

But I guess our opinions differ here.

The only way you get big defensive tics (pre-wolfhunter) when you are faction stacking a keep is if the enemy force is huge and the fight lasts a while. So at that point, the enemy is already zerging your keep. What do you expect defenders to do if it is a home keep? Just roll over and not send more people to defend because oh no, we don't want to faction stack our keep that is being zerged.

If the enemy force is like 20 people and you are faction stacking the keep for defense, whoopdee doo, you just got a 400AP tick when you wipe them. If the enemy is 50+, you either have to stack defenders or lose the keep. And if that 50+ grows and the fight takes an hour, why shouldn't you be rewarded well for the defense? In that same hour, you could have probably taken 6 undefended keeps and lost all of your home keeps in the process to the zerg. Good job.

This is not correct. There is no need for zerging to get huge ticks.
E.g. if you are alone and kill 5 guys => ~10k for the kills, 50k+ for the tick. (If you attack a keep it would get you 16k against the 5 guys (including the offence tick). Do you think risk / reward is balanced between offence / defense? I don't think so).

If a fight takes longer and there are plenty of enemies you would get decent AP anyway. I'd have been absolutely fine with getting a 15-30k tick instead of the 120k in the screenshot for the fight we had there. There was plenty of AP in the fight anyway.

And that is exactly the issue with these high ticks, it attracts everyone and it doesn't matter if the people are needed or not. Zerging is what the result is.

You are trying to say that zerging and faction stacking is only happening because of the defensive ticks. You are wrong. That was happening pre-summerset anyways. The only difference was, unless it was an emp keep or a home keep, no-one defended anything. At least now, players are defending keeps all over the map. It isn't the defenders fault that the zerg decides it must have Chalman or BRK. And my point was to show that faction stacking a keep that is not being hit with a large force results in very little AP, because a smaller tic is spread out among more players.

In your example, what most likely happened is you were the only player there (or one of a few) to get the tick. If the keep was faction stacked, as you claim is what is happening, your tick would have been like 2K AP or more likely less. The 100K or even 50K+ ticks are not the normal ticks, they are outliers. You cannot burn the whole system to the ground because of outliers. Most faction stacked ticks from fights that are over quickly are around 4K. And the ones that last 30M+ sit around 20-30K AP. Those are all reasonable numbers.

I have no idea how people come up with such low ticks. Playing on low level campaigns where ap gain is reduced?

Certainly, def ticks aren't the only reason for zerging. Yet, they encourage it. Regarding the keep defense you mentioned, idk, but that might be platform / campaign specific. I still don't see many keeps under siege at the same time. Usually I see one keep that gets all defenders.

If you refer to the 120k tick in the screenshot? No, there were many players around. Our group had approximately 10 players and there were like 25-40 others around.
I guess your numbers are quite off a bit.

Let's make a few examples and compare offense vs defense:

Example #1: AD fights EP. AD has 40 players, EP has 20 players. In this example AD will win.
In total 40 players die (20 AD and 20 EP). If they all give full AP this means that 80k AP are generated. 40k going to AD, 40k going to EP.
Now on the offense: The 40 players are going to take the keep and get 6k for winning 2k for the action (80k / 40 players). So the tick will be 8k and depending on who killed whom and so on some additional AP, but we are looking at ticks now, right?
Now on the defense (level 5): The defense tick will be around 10k each of the 40 players (2k each multiplied with the multiplicand (x5))

Example #2: AD fights again EP. AD has 50 players and EP has 50 players.
All of them wipe once in our example, which will generate 200k AP (2k each player).
On the offense: 6k for taking the keep + 4k (200k / 50 players) => 10k offense tick.
On the defense: 20k defense tick (200k / 50 players * multiplicand)

Example #3: Now lets say it is a long battle again with 50 players on each side. 500k AP will be generated.
On the Offense: 6k for taking the keep + 10k (500k / 50 players) = 16k
On the Defense: 50k defense tick (500k / 50 players * multiplicand)

And so on. And here you see the issue I'm trying to describe. In your 2-4k examples you were either on a low level campaign, defending a low level keep or zerging down a handful of players with the whole faction. Otherwise these low numbers aren't possible.

Furthermore you see that a defense can give a huge amount of AP very fast. In all the examples the defense could be over very fast (doesn't have to, but it is possible). Yet a successful offense often take longer. So you don't even have the time aspect in the calculations above.

The ticks simply were ridiculous. Nothing else. And again, don't get me wrong, pre-summerset def ticks weren't that great and buffing them is okay, but not in the way the did. Offense and defense ticks should align more.

TequilaFire wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

TequilaFire wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 plus ap to reach max AR rank so ap rewards should be scaled to match as that shouldn't take longer than the lifetime of the game.

There are plenty of AR 50 players around (even without role playing).

There didn't use to be as ap rewards were set too low, most have no desire to return to that.
Your extreme examples are just that extreme and double ap isn't in effect but once a year.
Now if you had to walk 20 miles back in the day, oh well...

All examples were without double AP including the screenshot. These examples (including the examples above) aren't extreme. They are quite common.

AP got already buffed before summerset, which was okay (implementation and role playing wasn't). Yet I even agree that buffing def ticks in general is okay, but not in this way.

Edit: Typo

You are overestimating player AP. Players only get max AP if the player they killed hadn't died in a while. Not every player is worth 2K AP, some are worth 0, some are worth 500. it depends on how long they have been alive for.

But regardless of that, you really have zero idea what you are talking about regarding defensive ticks. I have seen Arrius defenses net only 1K AP on the tick in Vivec on a level 5 keep because there were too many defenders to split the tick. This is after wiping 50 players or so. I have also seen hour long fights only net 30K AP after the tick. This is in Vivec, not some low level campaign to fit your uninformed arguments.

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

TequilaFire wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 plus ap to reach max AR rank so ap rewards should be scaled to match as that shouldn't take longer than the lifetime of the game.

There are plenty of AR 50 players around (even without role playing).

jaws343 wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

anadandy wrote: »

Frankly, I would rather have the D ticks be "too high" (and they weren't in my experience) than have defending a keep be worthless. There was zero incentive to defend keeps before that change - and maybe I'm looking at AW all wrong - but that seems contrary to the point of it. Sure, you might have boosting but the alternative is mindless flipping which is pretty much the same thing.

How about killing the attackers? Not rewarding enough? Isn't pvp meant for fighting?

I don't know about you - but I do kill attackers when defending a keep. It's not mutually exclusive. (sorry that sounded snarkier than I intended)

My question was if it isn't enough rewarding just killing the enemies as you wrote it will be worthless defending a keep without it, which isn't the case. Again, it is the goal of PvP (AvA), right? So why do you think you need a 5-7 time multiplier? It would simply be enough just getting a little bit more (if at all, but that's another discussion - it should just align with offensive ticks, which it doesn't).

Maybe not 5-7x (again, I must be playing wrong I never got that much!) but I would rather the scoring err on the side of more AP rather than making keep defense tick less AP than you'd get for mindlessly flipping a resource or town against NPCs. What that magic formula should be I don't know - but I do think that this change with the resources is a mistake - it's not going to change the gameplay in the way I think they are expecting it to.

I think where we might be getting hung up is where I said "zero incentive". I was speaking in general - not meaning it had zero incentive for me - but as someone said players follow the AP and if the defense AP isn't that great, they won't bother.

Well, it will reduce the ticks in all likelihood, which is a good thing. It might be too harsh and it still doesn't prevent exploitation. But i prefer reduced def ticks in comparison to what it was.

Just an example tick (this wasn't during the AP event, it was closely after the Summerset release):


It was an insanely high tick for the amount spent there. Anyway, I do not know the exact number of the multiplicator and as far as I heard it depends on the type of fight (2way vs 3way). Somewhere in the forums I've read about a 7x multiplicator. I'm not sure if that's correct, but x5 should be possible at a level 5 resource or keep. And that is my problem with all of this. I do not see a reason why I should get that much more AP. I probably would be fine if they had doubled it. But the current amount is just ridiculous.

Offense and Defense Ticks should be balanced such as that both are worth going for. Yet, when one wants to get AP and have to attack an enemy level 5 keep or would have to defend a level 5 keep (respectively level 2 now), for most players in most cases the defense would make sense, which exactly leads to faction stacking on that keep. Which is exactly what ZOS didn't recommend and leads to a huge zerging.

But I guess our opinions differ here.

The only way you get big defensive tics (pre-wolfhunter) when you are faction stacking a keep is if the enemy force is huge and the fight lasts a while. So at that point, the enemy is already zerging your keep. What do you expect defenders to do if it is a home keep? Just roll over and not send more people to defend because oh no, we don't want to faction stack our keep that is being zerged.

If the enemy force is like 20 people and you are faction stacking the keep for defense, whoopdee doo, you just got a 400AP tick when you wipe them. If the enemy is 50+, you either have to stack defenders or lose the keep. And if that 50+ grows and the fight takes an hour, why shouldn't you be rewarded well for the defense? In that same hour, you could have probably taken 6 undefended keeps and lost all of your home keeps in the process to the zerg. Good job.

This is not correct. There is no need for zerging to get huge ticks.
E.g. if you are alone and kill 5 guys => ~10k for the kills, 50k+ for the tick. (If you attack a keep it would get you 16k against the 5 guys (including the offence tick). Do you think risk / reward is balanced between offence / defense? I don't think so).

If a fight takes longer and there are plenty of enemies you would get decent AP anyway. I'd have been absolutely fine with getting a 15-30k tick instead of the 120k in the screenshot for the fight we had there. There was plenty of AP in the fight anyway.

And that is exactly the issue with these high ticks, it attracts everyone and it doesn't matter if the people are needed or not. Zerging is what the result is.

You are trying to say that zerging and faction stacking is only happening because of the defensive ticks. You are wrong. That was happening pre-summerset anyways. The only difference was, unless it was an emp keep or a home keep, no-one defended anything. At least now, players are defending keeps all over the map. It isn't the defenders fault that the zerg decides it must have Chalman or BRK. And my point was to show that faction stacking a keep that is not being hit with a large force results in very little AP, because a smaller tic is spread out among more players.

In your example, what most likely happened is you were the only player there (or one of a few) to get the tick. If the keep was faction stacked, as you claim is what is happening, your tick would have been like 2K AP or more likely less. The 100K or even 50K+ ticks are not the normal ticks, they are outliers. You cannot burn the whole system to the ground because of outliers. Most faction stacked ticks from fights that are over quickly are around 4K. And the ones that last 30M+ sit around 20-30K AP. Those are all reasonable numbers.

I have no idea how people come up with such low ticks. Playing on low level campaigns where ap gain is reduced?

Certainly, def ticks aren't the only reason for zerging. Yet, they encourage it. Regarding the keep defense you mentioned, idk, but that might be platform / campaign specific. I still don't see many keeps under siege at the same time. Usually I see one keep that gets all defenders.

If you refer to the 120k tick in the screenshot? No, there were many players around. Our group had approximately 10 players and there were like 25-40 others around.
I guess your numbers are quite off a bit.

Let's make a few examples and compare offense vs defense:

Example #1: AD fights EP. AD has 40 players, EP has 20 players. In this example AD will win.
In total 40 players die (20 AD and 20 EP). If they all give full AP this means that 80k AP are generated. 40k going to AD, 40k going to EP.
Now on the offense: The 40 players are going to take the keep and get 6k for winning 2k for the action (80k / 40 players). So the tick will be 8k and depending on who killed whom and so on some additional AP, but we are looking at ticks now, right?
Now on the defense (level 5): The defense tick will be around 10k each of the 40 players (2k each multiplied with the multiplicand (x5))

Example #2: AD fights again EP. AD has 50 players and EP has 50 players.
All of them wipe once in our example, which will generate 200k AP (2k each player).
On the offense: 6k for taking the keep + 4k (200k / 50 players) => 10k offense tick.
On the defense: 20k defense tick (200k / 50 players * multiplicand)

Example #3: Now lets say it is a long battle again with 50 players on each side. 500k AP will be generated.
On the Offense: 6k for taking the keep + 10k (500k / 50 players) = 16k
On the Defense: 50k defense tick (500k / 50 players * multiplicand)

And so on. And here you see the issue I'm trying to describe. In your 2-4k examples you were either on a low level campaign, defending a low level keep or zerging down a handful of players with the whole faction. Otherwise these low numbers aren't possible.

Furthermore you see that a defense can give a huge amount of AP very fast. In all the examples the defense could be over very fast (doesn't have to, but it is possible). Yet a successful offense often take longer. So you don't even have the time aspect in the calculations above.

The ticks simply were ridiculous. Nothing else. And again, don't get me wrong, pre-summerset def ticks weren't that great and buffing them is okay, but not in the way the did. Offense and defense ticks should align more.

TequilaFire wrote: »

InvitationNotFound wrote: »

TequilaFire wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 plus ap to reach max AR rank so ap rewards should be scaled to match as that shouldn't take longer than the lifetime of the game.

There are plenty of AR 50 players around (even without role playing).

There didn't use to be as ap rewards were set too low, most have no desire to return to that.
Your extreme examples are just that extreme and double ap isn't in effect but once a year.
Now if you had to walk 20 miles back in the day, oh well...

All examples were without double AP including the screenshot. These examples (including the examples above) aren't extreme. They are quite common.

AP got already buffed before summerset, which was okay (implementation and role playing wasn't). Yet I even agree that buffing def ticks in general is okay, but not in this way.

Edit: Typo

You are overestimating player AP. Players only get max AP if the player they killed hadn't died in a while. Not every player is worth 2K AP, some are worth 0, some are worth 500. it depends on how long they have been alive for.

But regardless of that, you really have zero idea what you are talking about regarding defensive ticks. I have seen Arrius defenses net only 1K AP on the tick in Vivec on a level 5 keep because there were too many defenders to split the tick. This is after wiping 50 players or so. I have also seen hour long fights only net 30K AP after the tick. This is in Vivec, not some low level campaign to fit your uninformed arguments.

You simply might have missed the tick (visually or registered for another keep)
Do the calculations. Let's say there were 50 players. you got 1k tick => 200 without multiplicand (or less). so we had 10k to be shared with 50 players => calculating again with 2k you will get 5 enemies. you see that there is something off pretty much.

By commenting about the AP per player you're simply missing the point. I'm well aware of how much AP they can give and when. That's not the point. The point is that the bigger the AP pool to share gets, the more the (level 5) defense tick matters and the correlation between offense and defense tick aren't appropriate anymore. Hence chances to make better AP for most players will simply be to go for defending a level 5 keep / resource.

Kind of hard to miss the tick when you are there for the entire fight. And it isn't like this is a single occurrence. Small ticks on stacked defenses happen alll the time. These 50K+ ticks are not a normal thing that is always happening. Even 20-30K ticks are rare. Also, most of the larger ticks are not a result of defensive multipliers and are more indicative of the underpopulation adjustments.

And the point of increasing the defensive ticks was to force people to defend more. Because if you remember, pre-summerset, zero people defended unless it was an emp keep. And you cannot make offensive and defensive ticks equal either. Because attacking an empty keep is still easier than defending and players will just Pvdoor again.