Won't go over what Krage already covered, suffice to say I agree, although I do think strong enough incentives WILL work to a large degree and they shouldn't be for the under-dog, they should be for whichever team you're loyal to. It's not about fairness or faction balance

We have integrated Razer Comms 3rd party mobile apps. People will already know from offline when their SF/Squad needs them, that's a feature. Which is why I said people should have a short FL on them when they're offline too, residual from their last play period. Perhaps we should be allowed to begin the unlock cooldown process ahead of time via mobile device *shrug*

If you do have an issue with players switching from Eldar to CSM in the middle of the battle then how do we enforce only that lock ? You can't prevent that abuse without applying the same lock to LSM or Orks. Due to the nature of the Primary campaign objectives and the 4 way competition multiple races will typically have a vested interest in the outcome of that major Eldar or CSM battle. CSM is ahead of LSM on their Primary objective progress coming in to the final part of the campaign, wonder which side of the battle LSMs will log on to during a crucial mission for the CSMs ?

You know I'm all in favour of the 'loyalty bonuses'. Absolutely, but they won't address 5th faction play, FF trolling or just messing with the campaign balance like a brief lock will. The more I think about it the more I'm sure a 1hr lock won't hurt friendships, which was my only concern in all of this aside from actively rewarding loyalty. If there are better solutions let's go with them, but 46 pages now and nothing solves those considerably damaging issues like accepting some lock-age. It's just too destructive to the entire concept of RvR to allow full movement and Krage's game list is just the start of my experience with that crap

I was thinking that there should be more of a region spawn block if the game shows a certain number of players fighting in one area.

Whether comparing these battles to other game or real life, I have no problem with reinforcements for any factions involved in a battle coming in from outside the area of the battle, there should be reserves and scouts in place to pick them up on the way in.

If storming a fortification the biggest blow to any battle is if the ensconced defenders number suddenly swell due to people logging in inside that fortification, put a bit of realism in it, force people to log in a minimum distance from a fortification and have to run through enemy lines to get there.

I'm also the sort of player that if I'm on my Ork and see Chaos besieging an Eldar fortification I wouldn't be inclined to swap, I'd be inclined to get the boyz together and hang back until the defences have crumbled, both factions have taken serious damage and then steam in and wipe out both sides to claim the fortification and piss them both off....

My biggest issue here and the reason that I voted no is that people are throwing around the suggestion of "hours" as a viable lock timer, if you're talking about a 30 minute lock then fine, but any longer than that and I'm completely against it.

On the subject of spying, the best way to manage spying is to create infiltration classes that are capable, due to in game skills and abilities, of spying on other factions within their own faction setting and thus rendering switching factions to spy "not worth the hassle".

I was wondering if someone would notice that.

I didn't talk about this kind of unpredictability although there are ppl who enjoy this one too. I meant just this: anything can happen - you can fight hard against your enemy and barely win, you can crush your enemy within minutes although you didn't expect that or you can lose horribly despite the fact you thought you were prepared and had a good plan.

This depends on the personality of players and these are different. Some ppl don't care if they win or lose, they just need intense emotions. Others only care about victories, no matter if they are hard won or easy ones.
I personally am somewhere in the middle. I can enjoy a lost battle when I know I did my best and had some really bad ass actions but I also like winning and if it comes easy, well, that means I just was much better, more credit to me.

Unpredictablility within the rules and common sense, soldiers don't switch sides back and forth during battles - that's not reasonable, that's not real, that's a fair game breaking mechanism and should be avoided at all costs. Switching sides is what makes battles so predictable, everybody joins the winning team, not the losing one. FL can prevent this thus works for the unpredictability - logics.

This, you don't need much imagination to predict what will happen as it has already happened in other games, that's why i'm on alert about this.

edit: (sorry for a triple post, somebody put that together pls )

I havent read through every post just take to long, but if there was a faction lock. Woundnt it be easy to lock factions in the first say 1-2 for the entire campaign and if you havent logged in it goes off a preference like which faction is your most preferred. So tick a box or it goes off how many hours youve played as that faction. Something like that anyway just an idea

It would be pretty easy to lock an account to just one faction. I believe that one of the ways they are going to sell this game is by the faction. So if you bought the space marine faction then you would be limited to the space marines and possibly the free to play ork boyz.

Now the issue for me is if you buy multiple factions or even the entire game and are then basically locked out of a lot of content that you purchased. I dont want to have to wait an hour or a week so I can play a faction that I bought.

I think that ingame balance measures should be robust enough to handle overpopped and zerging faction. For instance if the orks are enjoying a significant pop advantage and are smashing down territories with very little resistance then the tyranids should attack the orks in force and bleed off those extra players to defend their conquered territories.

I think the inclusion of the fifth faction npc tyranids is absolute genius and will go a long ways towards mitigating overpops that we have seen in many lesser games.

yeh i get what your talking about would suck if you couldnt play the faction you want to play when you want to play. If a faction did start to become overpower like you said smashing through territories thats what the nids are in the game for to make it more challenging for the faction rolling everyone and slow them down