Not all new/revolutionary ideas are good, and not all of them make the game more fun. So, just because a game has (or doesn't have) any revolutionary ideas doesnt make it a better/worse game. The question should be: is the game fun. If you say yes, then play that game, if no, then don't.
AmazingAvery:
1) In order to get rps (personal faction points) you have to kill enemies or somehow contribute to an objective. It's unclear atm how things will work in instanced pvp scenarios as well as afk people (or people elaving those instances when they lose) however due to wow and their experience with battlegrounds, it's obvious Mythic is aware of those things, and will likely try some solutions. What kind of solutions and will they work, we won't know untill beta/live.
2) Nothing, and there is no way to stop population imbalance. If you tell people they can't play destruction on server x with their friends because ti outnumbers order 2:1 chances are they just won't play your game. Also, daoc had 3 sides, but on many servers, especially at release, albion outnumbered other realsm greatly, sometimes albs having more people in rvr than the other 2 realms combined (Camelot in the title of the game and all =p)
However, war has much closer races/sides, population wise. Dwarfs are about as popular as greenskins, greenskins have goblins and orcs, but dwarfs have females (no gender for greenskins) than you have empire/chaos, basicaly good humans and bad humans, then you have high/dark elves, well, elves are elves =p Destruction seems to be more popular according to forum polls, but "the good guys" will likely be more popular at release. Still, war has much better foundation for balanced population than daoc or wow.
Instanced pvp. It will award the largest amount of victory points (points that determine who will control a zone) since you can only have so many people in an instance, it helps underpopulated realm. Also, I would assume there will be underpopulated realm bonuses, like extra exp/gold/rps etc. Mythic implemented those thigns in daoc, unfortunately way too late in the game to matter that much.
3) Not sure what you mean by team. Groups will have up to 6 people max. Instanced scenarions will have whatever number of players (but equal for both realms, or at least points equal) no restricions on realms population, since those restrictions don't work out too well.
Not all new/revolutionary ideas are good, and not all of them make the game more fun. So, just because a game has (or doesn't have) any revolutionary ideas doesnt make it a better/worse game. The question should be: is the game fun. If you say yes, then play that game, if no, then don't.
Read my post again, I said games with "revolutionary features CAN equal fun". Also, the same overdone, uncreative slop, does equal boredom. The question isn't "is the game fun" it is what makes the game fun. This is where you, the other gamers, and I separate. As I design and you play, thus I'm EXTREMELY critical of game developers and the uninventive rehash they try to sell to you guys.
- Burying Threads Since 1979 -
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by evil13
Not all new/revolutionary ideas are good, and not all of them make the game more fun. So, just because a game has (or doesn't have) any revolutionary ideas doesnt make it a better/worse game. The question should be: is the game fun. If you say yes, then play that game, if no, then don't. AmazingAvery: 1) In order to get rps (personal faction points) you have to kill enemies or somehow contribute to an objective. It's unclear atm how things will work in instanced pvp scenarios as well as afk people (or people elaving those instances when they lose) however due to wow and their experience with battlegrounds, it's obvious Mythic is aware of those things, and will likely try some solutions. What kind of solutions and will they work, we won't know untill beta/live. 2) Nothing, and there is no way to stop population imbalance. If you tell people they can't play destruction on server x with their friends because ti outnumbers order 2:1 chances are they just won't play your game. Also, daoc had 3 sides, but on many servers, especially at release, albion outnumbered other realsm greatly, sometimes albs having more people in rvr than the other 2 realms combined (Camelot in the title of the game and all =p) However, war has much closer races/sides, population wise. Dwarfs are about as popular as greenskins, greenskins have goblins and orcs, but dwarfs have females (no gender for greenskins) than you have empire/chaos, basicaly good humans and bad humans, then you have high/dark elves, well, elves are elves =p Destruction seems to be more popular according to forum polls, but "the good guys" will likely be more popular at release. Still, war has much better foundation for balanced population than daoc or wow. Instanced pvp. It will award the largest amount of victory points (points that determine who will control a zone) since you can only have so many people in an instance, it helps underpopulated realm. Also, I would assume there will be underpopulated realm bonuses, like extra exp/gold/rps etc. Mythic implemented those thigns in daoc, unfortunately way too late in the game to matter that much. 3) Not sure what you mean by team. Groups will have up to 6 people max. Instanced scenarions will have whatever number of players (but equal for both realms, or at least points equal) no restricions on realms population, since those restrictions don't work out too well.
Thank you for answering, you have covered pretty much everything I was unsure of, I have a much better idea now, cheers!
Vanguard !... and like I said.... this Site is not MMORPG.com its WarFans.net
VANGUARD PM AND ILL HELP YOU GET STARTED IN THE WORLD OF TELON
Give me a trial key and I`ll play right now. I`ll even do a full "positive" review and hand it to MMORPG.com
Originally posted by Zatoitchi
if you play mmorpg for "virtual accomplishment" an "praise by your peers" then your missing the whole point the genre was created for i also dont go for mmorpg's cause of there new exciting revoloutionary feature i go for fun factor plain an simple an war is fun just ask george w
How much research have you done on "why" the genre was created. Also, same boring features equals same boring games, this is why revolutionary features CAN equal fun, common sense.
mmorpg's an bikey gangs 2 completly differnt things but run the same underlying tone "social acceptance"
many lowlife hoodlam types turn to bikey gangs to feel socialy accepted by there peers an sense of accomplishment not only from that of there peers but also upon themselves a sense of belonging
same can be said of some mmorpg players be they loners , have poor social skills etc etc you no who im talking bout here we've prob all had more then a few in our guilds over the years ... who play certain types of games not because they are fun but because there the in thing to do or because they get social acceptance an a sense of accomplishment that may be lacking form there real life
there are many studies on this an the majority will go an play a game they dont like an have no fun playign because they are unwilling to part with this "virtual social acceptance" a very dangerous thing , not sayign everyone falls into that group but almost the majority do which is sad
im simple terms play mmorpg's for fun anythign else an you have a big problem was my point
back on topic
war is fun , if u dont think u will have fun playing it dont play it simple , no doubt your one of the immature players who thinks virtual nudity in aoc is an outsatnding gameplay feature thats been lacking in mmorpg for years
either that or go back an play uo cause everything else since then is just more of the same rehashed features
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by Zatoitchi
back on topic
war is fun , if u dont think u will have fun playing it dont play it simple , no doubt your one of the immature players who thinks virtual nudity in aoc is an outsatnding gameplay feature thats been lacking in mmorpg for years either that or go back an play uo cause everything else since then is just more of the same rehashed features
Originally posted by AmazingAvery From my understanding DAoC had 3 realms which were balanced out with each other quite well - from what I know WAR has 2 - So what measures are in place to stop one side from completely dominating the other?, and if it does happen either thru unbalanced classes or people not playing properly (see question 1) how will this be addressed?
Actually, as I understand it, DAOK had 3 realms that existed on a pretty well-known scale - dominant and challenger that occasionally flipped roles with a weak tertiary power that got constantly kicked around by the dominant two. Players always drifted to the top two realms, leaving the loyalists of the weaker realm the eternal underdogs who could only achieve short-lived victories by taking advantage of times when the dominant realms were busy with each other at a distant location. It had two competing realms and an "also showed." Dominating DAOK was all about controlling a few specific world objectives, which could be often grabbed with quick midnight raids.
WAR will have two realms, but six separate armies and three separate active lines of engagement. Those lines of engagement won't allow for domination through sudden midnight raids - no running through the zones and attacking an enemy capital allowed. To siege an enemy capital, you must first capture all intervening zones, making domination a slower process.
As far as I can see, the design folks at Mythic have created two modes of gemaply to reward both "top-notch players" and "large organized factions." We'll see open-field skirmish zones and a pretty wide array of battlefield objectives where large forces can battle, and where a large army will be able to dominate a weak opponent. But we'll also see something DAOK didn't have - instanced Scenarios where smaller groups skirmish and small teams of players can't be zerged by a numerically superior opponent.
One of the advantages of having three armies in each realm is that it will provide three careers for every archetype - three tank careers, three dps careers, etc. That would seem to create a situation where unbalanced careers will effect gameplay a bit less - if one of my realm's tank classes is weak, I still have two other options.
And if things do get unbalanced? I have no idea. I've heard that, in DAOK, Mythic gave xp bonuses and buffs to the weaker realms to balance numerical weakness and draw players into the weaker group. They haven't told us yet what their plans are for WAR.
Originally posted by AmazingAvery 3. Out of the two sides, how many people can take part in one particular team - how many to each side? can one side have more than the other?
Last rumor I heard was parties of six. No idea what kind of limits they're putting on raid-type groups, if that's what you mean.
Open field battles won't be limited. I know that DAOK often saw battles with two or three hundred people per side and I'd expect WAR servers to be able to handle the same load.
Some reporters who hit a demo day back in February mentioned that Scenarios were currently sized between 6 and 36 players per side, but dev comments since then have consistently repeated that they haven't settled on any sort of Scenario team sizes (besides, they're planning on balancing by battle points, not player numbers, as I understand it - eg, 500 battle point limit per side, each character being worth a different number of battle points based on its rank, equipment, enchantments, etc).
Here's a crazy idea for the OP: Don't play the game!
You obviously have nothing in WAR you look forward to, so why make a problem out of it? There are plenty of other games you can play, and I'm sure there's one out there that suits you perfectly.
I enjoyed DAoC a lot. The game lasted about 3 years for me, mainly because of RvR. WAR is made by the same company and will rely heavily on the RvR concept that I love so much, so of course I'm excited and look forward to the game. I don't care about revolutions, I care about having fun.
After watching some videos and reading a little more on WAR my perception is that it is pretty much the same old thing. I see very little that would cause me to stutter in disbelief, very little that I could call amazing and very little that doesn't resemble what I have seen in many of the releases of the past.
So, I would like to know what exactly is revving you up to play WAR?
Are you a long time offline WAR player, or possibly you see something which I have missed that is new and exciting.
Would like to see your point of view.
WAR is a PvP game. If u like PvP, great, play WAR and u'll love it. If ur in love with PvE (which i do not understand how anyone could be) then WAR may not be the best game for you. Although it still has PvE so you may still enjoy it.
What is it that makes Warhammer Online: Age of Reckoning exciting to the people who are following it? Most features of the game are familiar to MMOG veterans. Other games are looking to revolutionize combat mechanics - the paired combat graphics of G&H are an amazing undertaking, the directed-attacks of AoC an interesting effort. Both will contribute something of value to the next generation of MMOs. While WAR is adding features to the combat mechanics that I find exciting (the tactics pre-battle prep, the morale system, the way healers have to operate, collision detection, movement momentum), the underlying system is still the classic hot-bar actions and timers typically found in the MMO genre. Similarly, the Tome of Knowledge has its basis in the familiar Quest Journal, but then includes more (creature lore, kill board, rewards & awards records, famous encounters, all shareable with friends for bragging rights). A quick glance at the game will show you systems that you're familiar with, without really highlighting the evolutions that make those features exciting. The place to look for the real exciting development in WAR is RvR. Mythic isn't looking to revolutionize individual mechanics, they're looking to revolutionize the underlying game design. The actions you take in most games are meaningless, they have no impact. That lack of meaningful activity is what WAR is tackling.
At its highest level the RvR design is all about creating a meaningful conflict in the game - when questing you're not wondering around doing quests for little people, fetching their mail and delivering their grain; your fighting an enemy, delivering necessary supplies and critical dispatches - all of which sounds the same until you realize that every successful mission actually helps your side conquer territory and push the enemy forces back - it actually means something, has a real impact.
Another meaning of RvR (the meaning that DAOK players would recognize) - and the reason you may have heard the term substituted for PvP on occasion - is large group conflict. RvR isn't about me versus you, its about my squad or my regiment versus yours, battling for something important. We have no reason to go hunting each other individually; our targets are the contested objectives, and killing each other is just a happy byproduct. PvP happens, but it's meaningful, not random - whether you're challenging an enemy, ganking someone who just finished off a giant in the skirmish area, fighting in a scenario or over a battlefield, the deed is being done to earn victory points for your faction and conquer territory.
And that means that we're actually involved in a contest, a massive game of full-contact pwnage, not a series of random scuffles. We aren't competing for points on a ladder, we're competing for a grand-scale win. The PvE quests, the individual victories in lonely skirmishes, in squad-level scenarios and in regiment-sized battles all bring us to the biggest struggle of all, the game-winning point, crushing the enemy at their own capital city.
Its like the difference between keeping stats and actually playing a season. How fun would basketball, football or baseball be if their were no seasons, just individual games and player stats? In the past PvP has been an afterthought in most games, a system of keeping stats. WAR is developing the big contest, the meaningful context for the action, and a setting that changes based on the action.
Its not a permanent impact - its not a world where we can completely alter everything with a grand win or where every quest is individual and gone when we finish it. But it is a step in that direction, a game with changeable world and a living, breathing campaign that can be won or lost based on what we do. That's what's exciting about WAR. Note: Copied from a blog entry inspired by another thread asking the same question.
I have a couple of questions, just asking, just curious, not starting anything :
1. Because of the nature of RvR, how does WAR handle any leechers just looking for faction points and not contributing to the effort of the one side?
2. Alot of people have said that because Mythic made DAoC, and that they have implemented RvR there in a really good way, WAR will be good too - From my understanding DAoC had 3 realms which were balanced out with each other quite well - from what I know WAR has 2 - So what measures are in place to stop one side from completely dominating the other?, and if it does happen either thru unbalanced classes or people not playing properly (see question 1) how will this be addressed?
3. Out of the two sides, how many people can take part in one particular team - how many to each side? can one side have more than the other?
thanks for your time.
1) To the best of my knowledge, Mythic has not spoken specifically about how the game will address players "leaching" and not contributing to the collective goals in PvP or public quest environments. I think public quests will be one of the exciting twists WAR is bringing to the table. Rather than quests being competitive (e.g. I need to kill wolves and that bastard over there is killing wolves too so I have to wait for them to respawn) each zone will have a series of public quests that all the players in that particular zone can work on. You can come in at any part of the quest, and leave at any part of the quest, but obviously those players who participate in each phase of the public quest will receive a greater reward.
2) I'm not sure how directly (if at all) WAR will mimic DAoC's RvR system, but keep in mind though there are two key warring factions, they are broken into 3 armies on each side (Dwarfs/Greenskins, Order/Chaos, and High Elf/Dark Elf). I'm not sure how each faction on each side will relate to each other, I'm sure we'll hear more about this in the upcoming months as we near release.
3) They haven't gotten into the particulars of numbers of people permitted in each RvR/PvP or PvE encounter. It was mentioned somewhere on warhammeronline.com that NPCs will be used in some scenarios to balance the numbers between opposing players. Also, what they have said in their podcasts points to the fact that the majority of the things done in WAR will be largely be a collective effort for the betterment of your faction. And according to what they've teased us with so far, this won't equal the constant waiting in long queues or lots of downtime waiting for a pickup group. Upon entering a zone, you are working with the members of your faction who happen to be there, whether you're engaged in PvP or PvE.
Not all new/revolutionary ideas are good, and not all of them make the game more fun. So, just because a game has (or doesn't have) any revolutionary ideas doesnt make it a better/worse game. The question should be: is the game fun. If you say yes, then play that game, if no, then don't.
Read my post again, I said games with "revolutionary features CAN equal fun". Also, the same overdone, uncreative slop, does equal boredom. The question isn't "is the game fun" it is what makes the game fun. This is where you, the other gamers, and I separate. As I design and you play, thus I'm EXTREMELY critical of game developers and the uninventive rehash they try to sell to you guys.
There was actually a recent quote by the head of Mythic where he stated frankly that he believes any revolution in the genre will come from smaller, upstart developers, not big companies with lots of cash to throw around. They're not peddling WAR as a revolutionary game and I appreciate that they're not trying to market it as one. Sure, I think are going to be some fun innovations to established norms of the genre (most of which I've listed previously in this thread). But I think WAR is just another step in the polishing and refinement process of existing norms in the fantasy MMORPG that we've seen in the chain from UO to DAoC to WoW. If you think about that idea of revolution coming from the grassroots at the bottom as a business model in other fields, it holds true. Its never the big record companies that give us the revolutionary new bands. Its the small independent labels more often than not that seek out the new, innovative talent before the big guys, who make their money by playing it safe and giving the masses a polished product, catch on. In the eighties, it wasn't ultimately IBM that revolutionized home computing, but Apple and Microsoft. In the sixties, when the comic book industry was stale and cartoonish, people like Jack Kirby at Marvel freshened the field by adding realism and humanity to the characters. The list goes on and on.
War looks to be the best PvP system coming out, at least for me. I really don't like PvE so much, and with WAR's PvP from lvl 1 i'm very excited. The Classes look very fun and they should enable for some fun PvP. Thats my 2 cents.
After watching some videos and reading a little more on WAR my perception is that it is pretty much the same old thing. I see very little that would cause me to stutter in disbelief, very little that I could call amazing and very little that doesn't resemble what I have seen in many of the releases of the past.
So, I would like to know what exactly is revving you up to play WAR?
Are you a long time offline WAR player, or possibly you see something which I have missed that is new and exciting.
Would like to see your point of view.
What I expect from Warhammer is an updated DAoC.
I always wanted to play DAoC because I love the RvR idea, but I discover it too late, and few things put me off:
1) The average player was already maxed when I started to play so there was no one to group with.
2) The interface and generally the learning curve was too alien to me.
3) The graphics wasn't really that attractive (yes I am so shallow)
Personally I don't really care that is based on the Warhammer world.
What I want is a new DAoC were I can start afresh like any one else, and play a meaningful PVP and most importantly a decent RvR game
Yes nothing new, few recicled and updated ideas from DAoC and WoW.
But who cares, I just want to have fun, and you can bet that WAR will be fun to play.
I think just like Tunabun does about WAR online. What's so special about it? I've seen videos and screenshots even when I was playing DaoC and Mythic had no idea EA was going to buy them.
This game is not like DaoC. To be like DaoC there should not be instanced RvR and there should be 3 factions, at least.
What has this game to offer that others MMORPG don't? I see another do-quests-untill-you-max-level that lacks real PvP, you die you respawn like if nothing happened, and nothing new or innovative related to combat. Just select your target and let your farmed equipment do the job for you.
Everything I've seen in the vids look just exactly like World of Warcraft. Even the bar to cast your spells.
I think just like Tunabun does about WAR online. What's so special about it? I've seen videos and screenshots even when I was playing DaoC and Mythic had no idea EA was going to buy them. This game is not like DaoC. To be like DaoC there should not be instanced RvR and there should be 3 factions, at least. What has this game to offer that others MMORPG don't? I see another do-quests-untill-you-max-level that lacks real PvP, you die you respawn like if nothing happened, and nothing new or innovative related to combat. Just select your target and let your farmed equipment do the job for you. Everything I've seen in the vids look just exactly like World of Warcraft. Even the bar to cast your spells.
first off, WAR isnt an MMO, its a single player game with a pay - to - play online aspect, secondly, its being made by blizzard and its working title was world of warhammer for about 6 years (its been in development for 15), thirdly, when you die in pvp your account gets cancelled. if you dont like the sound of it, then i suggest you go play darkfall, im in the beta and its AWESOME!
I think just like Tunabun does about WAR online. What's so special about it? I've seen videos and screenshots even when I was playing DaoC and Mythic had no idea EA was going to buy them. This game is not like DaoC. To be like DaoC there should not be instanced RvR and there should be 3 factions, at least. What has this game to offer that others MMORPG don't? I see another do-quests-untill-you-max-level that lacks real PvP, you die you respawn like if nothing happened, and nothing new or innovative related to combat. Just select your target and let your farmed equipment do the job for you. Everything I've seen in the vids look just exactly like World of Warcraft. Even the bar to cast your spells.
first off, WAR isnt an MMO, its a single player game with a pay - to - play online aspect, secondly, its being made by blizzard and its working title was world of warhammer for about 6 years (its been in development for 15), thirdly, when you die in pvp your account gets cancelled. if you dont like the sound of it, then i suggest you go play darkfall, im in the beta and its AWESOME!
- everything above this line is bullshit -
I got a good laugh from that, and I like how you had to explain that it is bullshit for our more mongoloidish posters here on MMORPG.com
Am I wrong? Isn't pvp all around 2 factions one versus the other that fight in a constant war and the winner afther the campaing gets goodies from the enemy city or something like that?
Just what I said, no real PvP. Real PvP means everybody is friend untill someone breaks the Rules and becomes pirate/Pk/outlaw/thief whatever the fuck. And for a kill there must be reward/penalty a.k.a real consecuences, loosing your stuff/parts of your inventory or whatever.
This game has RvR, that means We against You. We die, doesn't matter we try it again another day.
By one kill order wins the SCENARIO (). There is not even role, its a FPS concept brought to an intended MMORPG game.
The funny thing of all this:
Main reason: Most people supporting this game has absolutely no bigger clue than me about WAR online, yet they LOVE it and defend it because its around Warhammer Universe concept.
Last reason: This game is going to be populated by freaking nerds kiddies whinning all over because they dind't win the scenario and those mature people will be screwed. EA = rated T for kids.
Am I wrong? Isn't pvp all around 2 factions one versus the other that fight in a constant war and the winner afther the campaing gets goodies from the enemy city or something like that? Just what I said, no real PvP. Real PvP means everybody is friend untill someone breaks the Rules and becomes pirate/Pk/outlaw/thief whatever the fuck. And for a kill there must be reward/penalty a.k.a real consecuences, loosing your stuff/parts of your inventory or whatever. This game has RvR, that means We against You. We die, doesn't matter we try it again another day. By one kill order wins the SCENARIO (). There is not even role, its a FPS concept brought to an intended MMORPG game.
Problem with all out pvp games, is there is very little consequence to being a PK. Dropping someone in the middle of a town or a lowbie questing has next to no consequence and is very unrealistic. If you want consequences play this game, when you die, pick a piece of gear and delete it. YOU want even more hardcore? Delete your character when you die and start over. Any decent player in an all out pvp system knows the ins and outs and how not to get burned, its no more challenging than tic tac toe.
Does anyone actually READ the myriads of Threads "What is so good about WAR" or "WoW=WAR omg lololz"? In every SINGLE one of them is the answer why WAR will be great fun.
If you dont like it, then dont play it, simple as that. I dont like AoC, the fighting style, the setting, the community. So I wont play it, if you dont think WAR is interesting, then shove off.
The thing that I think most people are excited about WAR for is simply the PvP/RvR oriented game play.
How many other MMORPGs have been release that are focused on PvP/RvR. we have DAOC which was good but its old and TOA and other issues which mythic now knows was wrong. and then we have guild wars which doesn’t have the persistent world and imo is lacking in a lot of immersive mmorpg aspects also based on small group pvp. Now what else do we have.... shadowbane... planetside... there isnt many games that are focused on PvP. I would say games like lineage 2 but that is a MASSIVE PvE grind.
PvP on the horizon. We have WAR. There is darkfall but who knows when that will come out. I don’t want to say AoC because although it has pvp end game their main goal is not a PvP focused game. Fury, that game looks good but it doesn’t look like it will have that mmo feel.
Basically there is nothing else there, and for the other games with some PvP, they don’t have the backing that this game dose. This game is being made by people who have made a PvP game, screwed a PvP game up, Realized mistakes and good points, and know what they are doing now.
Also the PvE in this game seems exciting. They have a variety of new quest ideas and their lore book or w/e it's called will track the story as you progress through the tiers. I have a feeling that the PvE will be a lot better than many people think
The developers have also said that if you want to just PvE to progress through the game you can.
In the end this game is a PvP focused game with interesting new PvE quest ideas, and new ways to play traditional classes. (The healers have to FIGHT!)
------------------------------------------------- Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 60.00%, Socializer 33.33%
With that line of thinking why would any one ever buy more then one FPS game in there life time. It just doesnt work that way, you are focusing on something that is way to small and ignoring the rest of the game.
You call your self a game designer but you write that game off before you even tried it, you dont even have a clue what its like yet........
If only i could find a troll with a tin foil hat. =(
Comments
Not all new/revolutionary ideas are good, and not all of them make the game more fun. So, just because a game has (or doesn't have) any revolutionary ideas doesnt make it a better/worse game. The question should be: is the game fun. If you say yes, then play that game, if no, then don't.
AmazingAvery:
1) In order to get rps (personal faction points) you have to kill enemies or somehow contribute to an objective. It's unclear atm how things will work in instanced pvp scenarios as well as afk people (or people elaving those instances when they lose) however due to wow and their experience with battlegrounds, it's obvious Mythic is aware of those things, and will likely try some solutions. What kind of solutions and will they work, we won't know untill beta/live.
2) Nothing, and there is no way to stop population imbalance. If you tell people they can't play destruction on server x with their friends because ti outnumbers order 2:1 chances are they just won't play your game. Also, daoc had 3 sides, but on many servers, especially at release, albion outnumbered other realsm greatly, sometimes albs having more people in rvr than the other 2 realms combined (Camelot in the title of the game and all =p)
However, war has much closer races/sides, population wise. Dwarfs are about as popular as greenskins, greenskins have goblins and orcs, but dwarfs have females (no gender for greenskins) than you have empire/chaos, basicaly good humans and bad humans, then you have high/dark elves, well, elves are elves =p Destruction seems to be more popular according to forum polls, but "the good guys" will likely be more popular at release. Still, war has much better foundation for balanced population than daoc or wow.
Instanced pvp. It will award the largest amount of victory points (points that determine who will control a zone) since you can only have so many people in an instance, it helps underpopulated realm. Also, I would assume there will be underpopulated realm bonuses, like extra exp/gold/rps etc. Mythic implemented those thigns in daoc, unfortunately way too late in the game to matter that much.
3) Not sure what you mean by team. Groups will have up to 6 people max. Instanced scenarions will have whatever number of players (but equal for both realms, or at least points equal) no restricions on realms population, since those restrictions don't work out too well.
- Burying Threads Since 1979 -
Give me a trial key and I`ll play right now. I`ll even do a full "positive" review and hand it to MMORPG.com
How much research have you done on "why" the genre was created. Also, same boring features equals same boring games, this is why revolutionary features CAN equal fun, common sense.
mmorpg's an bikey gangs 2 completly differnt things but run the same underlying tone "social acceptance"
many lowlife hoodlam types turn to bikey gangs to feel socialy accepted by there peers an sense of accomplishment not only from that of there peers but also upon themselves a sense of belonging
same can be said of some mmorpg players be they loners , have poor social skills etc etc you no who im talking bout here we've prob all had more then a few in our guilds over the years ... who play certain types of games not because they are fun but because there the in thing to do or because they get social acceptance an a sense of accomplishment that may be lacking form there real life
there are many studies on this an the majority will go an play a game they dont like an have no fun playign because they are unwilling to part with this "virtual social acceptance" a very dangerous thing , not sayign everyone falls into that group but almost the majority do which is sad
im simple terms play mmorpg's for fun anythign else an you have a big problem was my point
back on topic
war is fun , if u dont think u will have fun playing it dont play it simple , no doubt your one of the immature players who thinks virtual nudity in aoc is an outsatnding gameplay feature thats been lacking in mmorpg for years
either that or go back an play uo cause everything else since then is just more of the same rehashed features
Actually, as I understand it, DAOK had 3 realms that existed on a pretty well-known scale - dominant and challenger that occasionally flipped roles with a weak tertiary power that got constantly kicked around by the dominant two. Players always drifted to the top two realms, leaving the loyalists of the weaker realm the eternal underdogs who could only achieve short-lived victories by taking advantage of times when the dominant realms were busy with each other at a distant location. It had two competing realms and an "also showed." Dominating DAOK was all about controlling a few specific world objectives, which could be often grabbed with quick midnight raids.
WAR will have two realms, but six separate armies and three separate active lines of engagement. Those lines of engagement won't allow for domination through sudden midnight raids - no running through the zones and attacking an enemy capital allowed. To siege an enemy capital, you must first capture all intervening zones, making domination a slower process.
As far as I can see, the design folks at Mythic have created two modes of gemaply to reward both "top-notch players" and "large organized factions." We'll see open-field skirmish zones and a pretty wide array of battlefield objectives where large forces can battle, and where a large army will be able to dominate a weak opponent. But we'll also see something DAOK didn't have - instanced Scenarios where smaller groups skirmish and small teams of players can't be zerged by a numerically superior opponent.
One of the advantages of having three armies in each realm is that it will provide three careers for every archetype - three tank careers, three dps careers, etc. That would seem to create a situation where unbalanced careers will effect gameplay a bit less - if one of my realm's tank classes is weak, I still have two other options.
And if things do get unbalanced? I have no idea. I've heard that, in DAOK, Mythic gave xp bonuses and buffs to the weaker realms to balance numerical weakness and draw players into the weaker group. They haven't told us yet what their plans are for WAR.
Last rumor I heard was parties of six. No idea what kind of limits they're putting on raid-type groups, if that's what you mean.
Open field battles won't be limited. I know that DAOK often saw battles with two or three hundred people per side and I'd expect WAR servers to be able to handle the same load.
Some reporters who hit a demo day back in February mentioned that Scenarios were currently sized between 6 and 36 players per side, but dev comments since then have consistently repeated that they haven't settled on any sort of Scenario team sizes (besides, they're planning on balancing by battle points, not player numbers, as I understand it - eg, 500 battle point limit per side, each character being worth a different number of battle points based on its rank, equipment, enchantments, etc).
Here's a crazy idea for the OP: Don't play the game!
You obviously have nothing in WAR you look forward to, so why make a problem out of it? There are plenty of other games you can play, and I'm sure there's one out there that suits you perfectly.
I enjoyed DAoC a lot. The game lasted about 3 years for me, mainly because of RvR. WAR is made by the same company and will rely heavily on the RvR concept that I love so much, so of course I'm excited and look forward to the game. I don't care about revolutions, I care about having fun.
I have a couple of questions, just asking, just curious, not starting anything :
1. Because of the nature of RvR, how does WAR handle any leechers just looking for faction points and not contributing to the effort of the one side?
2. Alot of people have said that because Mythic made DAoC, and that they have implemented RvR there in a really good way, WAR will be good too - From my understanding DAoC had 3 realms which were balanced out with each other quite well - from what I know WAR has 2 - So what measures are in place to stop one side from completely dominating the other?, and if it does happen either thru unbalanced classes or people not playing properly (see question 1) how will this be addressed?
3. Out of the two sides, how many people can take part in one particular team - how many to each side? can one side have more than the other?
thanks for your time.
1) To the best of my knowledge, Mythic has not spoken specifically about how the game will address players "leaching" and not contributing to the collective goals in PvP or public quest environments. I think public quests will be one of the exciting twists WAR is bringing to the table. Rather than quests being competitive (e.g. I need to kill wolves and that bastard over there is killing wolves too so I have to wait for them to respawn) each zone will have a series of public quests that all the players in that particular zone can work on. You can come in at any part of the quest, and leave at any part of the quest, but obviously those players who participate in each phase of the public quest will receive a greater reward.
2) I'm not sure how directly (if at all) WAR will mimic DAoC's RvR system, but keep in mind though there are two key warring factions, they are broken into 3 armies on each side (Dwarfs/Greenskins, Order/Chaos, and High Elf/Dark Elf). I'm not sure how each faction on each side will relate to each other, I'm sure we'll hear more about this in the upcoming months as we near release.
3) They haven't gotten into the particulars of numbers of people permitted in each RvR/PvP or PvE encounter. It was mentioned somewhere on warhammeronline.com that NPCs will be used in some scenarios to balance the numbers between opposing players. Also, what they have said in their podcasts points to the fact that the majority of the things done in WAR will be largely be a collective effort for the betterment of your faction. And according to what they've teased us with so far, this won't equal the constant waiting in long queues or lots of downtime waiting for a pickup group. Upon entering a zone, you are working with the members of your faction who happen to be there, whether you're engaged in PvP or PvE.
There was actually a recent quote by the head of Mythic where he stated frankly that he believes any revolution in the genre will come from smaller, upstart developers, not big companies with lots of cash to throw around. They're not peddling WAR as a revolutionary game and I appreciate that they're not trying to market it as one. Sure, I think are going to be some fun innovations to established norms of the genre (most of which I've listed previously in this thread). But I think WAR is just another step in the polishing and refinement process of existing norms in the fantasy MMORPG that we've seen in the chain from UO to DAoC to WoW. If you think about that idea of revolution coming from the grassroots at the bottom as a business model in other fields, it holds true. Its never the big record companies that give us the revolutionary new bands. Its the small independent labels more often than not that seek out the new, innovative talent before the big guys, who make their money by playing it safe and giving the masses a polished product, catch on. In the eighties, it wasn't ultimately IBM that revolutionized home computing, but Apple and Microsoft. In the sixties, when the comic book industry was stale and cartoonish, people like Jack Kirby at Marvel freshened the field by adding realism and humanity to the characters. The list goes on and on.
-red
I always wanted to play DAoC because I love the RvR idea, but I discover it too late, and few things put me off:
1) The average player was already maxed when I started to play so there was no one to group with.
2) The interface and generally the learning curve was too alien to me.
3) The graphics wasn't really that attractive (yes I am so shallow)
Personally I don't really care that is based on the Warhammer world.
What I want is a new DAoC were I can start afresh like any one else, and play a meaningful PVP and most importantly a decent RvR game
Yes nothing new, few recicled and updated ideas from DAoC and WoW.
But who cares, I just want to have fun, and you can bet that WAR will be fun to play.
I think just like Tunabun does about WAR online. What's so special about it? I've seen videos and screenshots even when I was playing DaoC and Mythic had no idea EA was going to buy them.
This game is not like DaoC. To be like DaoC there should not be instanced RvR and there should be 3 factions, at least.
What has this game to offer that others MMORPG don't? I see another do-quests-untill-you-max-level that lacks real PvP, you die you respawn like if nothing happened, and nothing new or innovative related to combat. Just select your target and let your farmed equipment do the job for you.
Everything I've seen in the vids look just exactly like World of Warcraft. Even the bar to cast your spells.
first off, WAR isnt an MMO, its a single player game with a pay - to - play online aspect, secondly, its being made by blizzard and its working title was world of warhammer for about 6 years (its been in development for 15), thirdly, when you die in pvp your account gets cancelled. if you dont like the sound of it, then i suggest you go play darkfall, im in the beta and its AWESOME!
- everything above this line is bullshit -
first off, WAR isnt an MMO, its a single player game with a pay - to - play online aspect, secondly, its being made by blizzard and its working title was world of warhammer for about 6 years (its been in development for 15), thirdly, when you die in pvp your account gets cancelled. if you dont like the sound of it, then i suggest you go play darkfall, im in the beta and its AWESOME!
- everything above this line is bullshit -
I got a good laugh from that, and I like how you had to explain that it is bullshit for our more mongoloidish posters here on MMORPG.com
Am I wrong? Isn't pvp all around 2 factions one versus the other that fight in a constant war and the winner afther the campaing gets goodies from the enemy city or something like that?
Just what I said, no real PvP. Real PvP means everybody is friend untill someone breaks the Rules and becomes pirate/Pk/outlaw/thief whatever the fuck. And for a kill there must be reward/penalty a.k.a real consecuences, loosing your stuff/parts of your inventory or whatever.
This game has RvR, that means We against You. We die, doesn't matter we try it again another day.
By one kill order wins the SCENARIO (
The funny thing of all this:
Main reason: Most people supporting this game has absolutely no bigger clue than me about WAR online, yet they LOVE it and defend it because its around Warhammer Universe concept.
Last reason: This game is going to be populated by freaking nerds kiddies whinning all over because they dind't win the scenario and those mature people will be screwed. EA = rated T for kids.
No need to troll about this Topic even further...
The thing that I think most people are excited about WAR for is simply the PvP/RvR oriented game play.
How many other MMORPGs have been release that are focused on PvP/RvR. we have DAOC which was good but its old and TOA and other issues which mythic now knows was wrong. and then we have guild wars which doesn’t have the persistent world and imo is lacking in a lot of immersive mmorpg aspects also based on small group pvp. Now what else do we have.... shadowbane... planetside... there isnt many games that are focused on PvP. I would say games like lineage 2 but that is a MASSIVE PvE grind.
PvP on the horizon. We have WAR. There is darkfall but who knows when that will come out. I don’t want to say AoC because although it has pvp end game their main goal is not a PvP focused game. Fury, that game looks good but it doesn’t look like it will have that mmo feel.
Basically there is nothing else there, and for the other games with some PvP, they don’t have the backing that this game dose. This game is being made by people who have made a PvP game, screwed a PvP game up, Realized mistakes and good points, and know what they are doing now.
Also the PvE in this game seems exciting. They have a variety of new quest ideas and their lore book or w/e it's called will track the story as you progress through the tiers. I have a feeling that the PvE will be a lot better than many people think
The developers have also said that if you want to just PvE to progress through the game you can.
In the end this game is a PvP focused game with interesting new PvE quest ideas, and new ways to play traditional classes. (The healers have to FIGHT!)
-------------------------------------------------
Achiever 20.00%, Explorer 86.67%, Killer 60.00%, Socializer 33.33%
EKSA
-------------------------------------------------
With that line of thinking why would any one ever buy more then one FPS game in there life time. It just doesnt work that way, you are focusing on something that is way to small and ignoring the rest of the game.
You call your self a game designer but you write that game off before you even tried it, you dont even have a clue what its like yet........
If only i could find a troll with a tin foil hat. =(