Runes of Magic US / AU

There was a thread already for this, a lot of stuff was proposed and nothing came of it, don't expect any changes, i doubt any resources will be put in the game at this point. Except the level cap and new zones. Siege war is boring since there is not enough players left on the servers to make it fun sadly.

10k guilds are supposed to lose to 45k guilds....that is kinda the point. The system is actually pretty well designed for the most part. But, what Zidlef says above is partly true, it is really only effective with more players in the mix. What you have now is one guild that has most of the top players...so, yeah, they are going to win most, if not all, of their seiges. Periodically they break up and disperse players to other guilds and things get more even, but soon they all gravitate to the current "winner" and it becomes OP and the cycle repeats itself. What can i say, it is human nature to want to be on the winning side.

What you are suggesting is to penalize someone because they are better, which, like most of Socialism, is just a bad idea dressed up in idealism.

This won't happen lol all I can say is get better.

Quoted from "Asborjn"

10 of them

At least the people in Erebos can count
Jokes aside, it would help your cause if when V³ sees you're not trying that day and leave the Battlefield to do something that's more fun than bashing gates for 25 minutes to an hour, really only depends on whether or not you guys felt like logging on your pair(s) of Priest/Warlocks and Champion/Mages, 8 of your people didn't come in and cap back all towers and won. You're just shooting yourselves in the foot lol. You would've had less points than a Mithras guild by now if you hadn't won turned around empty Sieges, and probably had different match ups.

If this idea were to be implemented, then the higher point guilds could just purposely lose siege wars to lower their points or just move to a low point guild and have an even greater advantage in siege. What then would you propose to do about that since siege war points seem to matter so much.

Personally, I think the best plan would be to just make a different GM be our herald every time. That way we can spend the whole siege asking for fearless and crit and get nothing, and then at the end when we lose they can come in and let us know that our complaints are being forwarded to the next siege's GM herald.

Just a suggestion, maybe one of the GMs can pass it on.

Quoted from "Heimdallthewise"

Personally, I think the best plan would be to just make a different GM be our herald every time. That way we can spend the whole siege asking for fearless and crit and get nothing, and then at the end when we lose they can come in and let us know that our complaints are being forwarded to the next siege's GM herald.

Just a suggestion, maybe one of the GMs can pass it on.

Hi there,

You seem to have some salty QQ raged sarcasm going on. If you think you could do any better, I welcome you to submit an application here and we'll take it under advisement. Or we'll just forward it on. One or the other.

Sarcasm against the GM team in this nature will not be tolerated. Enjoy your vacation. Back on topic, please.

Issue with siege is, there is never going to be a decent way to pair people, because if they dont match you and the next strong guild, all you get is the next guild after you crying that they stand no chance vs a 45k point guild. Realistically, a 10k point guild, should stand a stronger chance against a 45k point guild, then a guild with 2k points, and because you dont want to fight a guild vs 45k point guild, why would it be fair for a guild with 2k points(probably a casual siege guild) to play vs a 45k point guild(clearly its a pvp based guild)

The way the matches work atm is fair, and if you don't want to show up vs a guild with 45k points, don't try, but imo, its not fair for the 45k point guild to be handicapped, purely because they're stronger, why does a 45k point guild deserve to lose badges AND points, because the only way the lower guilds will try is if they cant have their home towers capped. If you want to stand a stronger chance vs bigger guilds, i'd suggest trying to grab people from other guilds to make a strong sw guild, and see if that works.

Quoted from "Asborjn"

Proposal





To make siege warfare a lot more fun and fair to all guilds,
I propose the following changes:


After 1-2 weeks of a 10K guild having to fight a 45K guild
over and over it has come to the point neither side shows up or 10 of them destroy 20 of us. I can only imagine a 12 point guild drawing a high point guild would feel the same. i.e. (Why show up)


So I propose a few changes, if a guild is more than 5k
(2.5k) points higher or lower than its opponent the lower guild’s towers would be
immune to being taken. This would require the lower level guild to only have to take 1 tower to tie
the game.
Larger differences point wise, the lower guilds towers are
immune and the higher guild cannot have Herald abilities, no
speed for higher guild, gates twice as hard to get through for higher guild, etc.


This would have to be determined by the developers, possibly through
player input but it would at least allow lower level guilds to have a chance of
tying and even getting lucky and winning against a higher level guild.

I would not penalize players by suggesting the higher level
guild would have less players allowed in, those who want to siege should be
allowed to. But there has to be a better
way to get a diversity of guilds going up against each other in siege warfare. I am really tired of roof camping for an hour!

Ok. Are you saying "lower guild towers" are only your backs because the siege starts out tied (so if you capped one tower and your three are "immune" then you win... not tie.) I'm also assuming that any towers you cap don't become immune because that would be horribly unfair to the higher point guild no matter how OP they are and will make siege war become p/r rotations and wtf wants that.

Also, if the higher point guild doesn't get herald and your gate is twice as strong, that is implying that the higher point guild will need 20 scrolls to take down your gate which is ridiculous. Even if that miraculously happens you'll most likely ch/m and p/wl it so you might as well make your gates immune.

Assuming you are EC, every time you guys legit show up and fight us there are a lot of decent fights and the tower occupations end up pretty close (since we don't have the people to camp backs and ninja-cap like you guys do and when you guys show we normally can't even hold your homes). Imo the big teamfights are what matter more than winning in siege.

Not showing up just because a guild has more points than you or if they've beaten you in teamfights before is honestly pretty poor attitude and is the biggest reason why siege war seems bad. Given the current higher-end U.S. siege wars there is no reason to nerf the crap out of the higher point guild since the fights are good if both sides try. If you give up in the Registration phase then ofc you'll lose.


Kalvan was here

Quoted from "Cenre"

Issue with siege is, there is never going to be a decent way to pair people, because if they dont match you and the next strong guild, all you get is the next guild after you crying that they stand no chance vs a 45k point guild. Realistically, a 10k point guild, should stand a stronger chance against a 45k point guild, then a guild with 2k points, and because you dont want to fight a guild vs 45k point guild, why would it be fair for a guild with 2k points(probably a casual siege guild) to play vs a 45k point guild(clearly its a pvp based guild)

The way the matches work atm is fair, and if you don't want to show up vs a guild with 45k points, don't try, but imo, its not fair for the 45k point guild to be handicapped, purely because they're stronger, why does a 45k point guild deserve to lose badges AND points, because the only way the lower guilds will try is if they cant have their home towers capped. If you want to stand a stronger chance vs bigger guilds, i'd suggest trying to grab people from other guilds to make a strong sw guild, and see if that works.

97% of the decked out SW geared players on Erebos are already in the same guild

EC could win if they stopped giving up after 10 minutes. Or not showing at all. The reality is that nobody wants to try unless they're pretty sure they're gonna win, so nobody shows up for the 45K point guilds. That's why they've gotten to 45K points.

Anyway this idea is bad. You shouldn't be punishing players just because they're better. Also a guild might be 5K points higher than another but that doesn't mean they're overwhelmingly better that they could still win if you handicapped them that badly.

Also you can register for 6pm est

Quoted from "Asborjn"

This would require the lower level guild to only have to take 1 tower to tie
the game.

(it would only take one tower to win)

Translation: Sad cuz mad cuz bad. Assuming that you are talking about Ecom and V3, (I don't know how you wouldn't be), you guys have the best players of your server and only show vs us when you have a good chance of a tie or better. The reason you guys are at 10 and we are at 45 is because you won't fight as a team when it gets ruff. I honestly don't see how a guild worth half its salt could lose or even tie with the limitations you suggested put on its opponents. The only possible outcome of that is a race to get to the bottom lul.

Quoted from "Radium"

Not showing up just because a guild has more points than you or if they've beaten you in teamfights before is honestly pretty poor attitude

This is the real problem that needs to change.

Quoted from "Aqualink"

Quoted from "Heimdallthewise"
Personally, I think the best plan would be to just make a different GM be our herald every time. That way we can spend the whole siege asking for fearless and crit and get nothing, and then at the end when we lose they can come in and let us know that our complaints are being forwarded to the next siege's GM herald.

Just a suggestion, maybe one of the GMs can pass it on.



Hi there,

You seem to have some salty QQ raged sarcasm going on. If you think you could do any better, I welcome you to submit an application here and we'll take it under advisement. Or we'll just forward it on. One or the other.

Sarcasm against the GM team in this nature will not be tolerated. Enjoy your vacation. Back on topic, please.

One last note, I love that Heimdall makes a comment about the GMs in a perfectly PC manner but because the "tone isn't right" (read: I feel bad about not listening to my player base and don't want to face the music) Heimdall gets a ban for discussing the problems facing our game; don't get me wrong I think he could have worded it better but I think that you're just salty because you can't handle criticism.

I'll probably be banned just for posting this but in case my message is still up; know that you are losing customers by the day and when you don't start listening to the criticism of those who are still with you, you're gunna have a bad time.

Quoted from "axeguy314"

read: I feel bad about not listening to my player base and don't want to face the music

We spend hours and days listening to the player base, and do our best to improve it. For our trouble we mostly get complaints that we don't do enough, or don't do anything. We know it's because the people who post are usually the angriest ones, but it does get old. We have here perfectly reasonable discussion about how to modify and maybe improve siege, wherein several users have suggestions and rebuttals. Then along comes a crack-wise user who posts a thinly-veiled whine about 'lets just have the GMs ignore us some more and pretend to forward our suggestions' wrapped up with just enough keywords to look even remotely related to the topic. This is not constructive criticism, this is a whiney grump-fit. Neither is it a 'legit suggestion', it is purely a dig at people who work hard for you. Come back at me when you do half as much to support or improve the community. Applications are at the top of the page.

As for people leaving daily, we hammer that point home to gameforge employees as often as possible. Maybe that's why they've done the trailer contest and facebook advertising. It's hard to say when the company is so opaque about its actions and reasonings.

As for attempting to correct some of the matchup problems siege has: I suggest that the largest PVP sieges on each server sort out how to have two siege-minded guilds per server. Make them as even as you can. Then enjoy PVPing each other. Outside of siege, the split-guilds could still do their runs together with no problem.

Last warning. This topic is about siegewar. Not about how people may or may not think that the GM's do or do not do their job. If you'd like to know what our job entails, please feel free to submit an application.

Otherwise, stick to the topic or it will be closed.

Sadly siege war is all Fearless caps, using catapults to cap or a warden, they will not fix this because they've lost interest, and still wondering why there is no mention of Runes of Magic on Runewaker corporate webpage?? guess that should tell us a lot. Since they have no advertisement for he game, don't hope to get any new players to come along and increase your ranks. Just gotta deal with a crappy design to do PvP and forget about those promises that : THEY WERE LOOKING IN OTHER WAYS TO DO PvP in siege.

Here's an idea that will make the game a lot more fun.

1. Increase the player limit from 36 to 72.
2. Instead of guilds being organized by point value, have it be completely random.
3. Instead of one Guild vs 1 Guild. Have the system randomly pair up two guilds against another randomly selected pair.
4. The castle used will be determined by averaging all of the building levels plus the guild level. Higher value will be the castle used.

Siege was kinda ruined when siege gear + buff alts became a thing. The difference between a regular person and a siege geared player using K/P and W/P is so big, it makes siege basically just the 1-2 siege geared and buffed players fighting it out while everyone else just walks out to repeatedly get killed, which is probably one of the major reasons why by this point there's such a low attendance rate for siege. Back when everyone was a 2 shot, at least siege was something the whole guild could participate. Now, for alot of people, you hit them for 20k and they hit you for 200k+; its not fun for you and its not fun for them.

You can't have better matchups if there aren't any god matchups possible, no matter how good your siege matching system is.

Well getting 1 hitted is not fun but it prob would of been better if damage was adjusted on players when using a skill instead of sw gear but hey.