Criticism is not what you posted. Criticism in general terms means democraticjudgement over the suitability of a subject for the intended purposes, as opposed to the authoritariancommand, which is meant as an absolute realization of the authority's will, thus not open for debate. Criticism is the activity of judgement or informed interpretation. In literary and academic contexts, the term most frequently refers to literary criticism, art criticism, or other such fields, and to scholars' attempts to understand the aesthetic object in depth.
huh?
That would be the problem. Pay close atention to the first paragraph, read it slow...look up words if needed.
we are discusssing pvp in aoc here. If you want to discuss authoritarian command and such, go to some pompous literary forum to discuss that. thanks.
I still don't understand. You want meaninful World PVP? If so, I feel your pain. This would mean that story and pve would have to take the low road in a war scenerio.
My meaning in this is that the PvP in a war environment would have to be what the game is all about. Sacking towns, building alliances...killing off enemies in the hopes of becoming totally dominate. But being cyclic so that new folks two years down the road are able to make a stake themselves. Pve to hold your attention between this.
However, If your speaking of Full Loot...I am kinda against this as the idea stands now. I'm very practical about this. If the game has awesome weapons in it, and it takes any sort of extended time to get these items, of course I would never want it to be LOOTED. But if it could be, That would just mean that these items mean nothing...AND NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE, YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE IT. I don't care if you run with the largest guild in existence, YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE THAT COVETED ITEM. THAT SWORD OF DRAGONSLAYING should not even be weilded because it won't be yours for long.
Even Darkfall with the backpack ready to go in the bank isn't really a good idea to me, but I guess it would work in a game like that where items mean jack. But it's going to be medieval FPS...which is something I can personally do without as I rather play actual FPS's for that.
I think AoC is gonna be just fine.
But if you really want meaningful pvp.....ASK for PERMA DEATH.
I still don't understand. You want meaninful World PVP? If so, I feel your pain. This would mean that story and pve would have to take the low road in a war scenerio. My meaning in this is that the PvP in a war environment would have to be what the game is all about. Sacking towns, building alliances...killing off enemies in the hopes of becoming totally dominate. .
You are right. No mainstream game will do this. But if a niche game like Darkfall becomes really popular, then you will see more mainstream games following suit.
Dr MrBloodworth, You are my new diety. A very nice explanation that requires a minimum of a college-level intellect to comprehend. And the OP's response clears up my doubts in that area.
And both of you are missing the boat about what criticism really is.... using fancy college words doesn't make you smarter.... especially in the wrong context.
Criticism:
First two definitions are:
1. The act of criticizing, especially adversely.
2. A critical comment or judgment.
also this..... 'disapproval expressed by pointing out faults or shortcomings; "the senator received severe criticism from his opponent"
I'd say most posters here follow the above description of criticism......
Whew....how do we get back on topic....
Oh yes...I think PVP in AOC is going to be pretty fun..... but I'll probably still stick with EVE and WAR.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Dr MrBloodworth, You are my new diety. A very nice explanation that requires a minimum of a college-level intellect to comprehend. And the OP's response clears up my doubts in that area.
look up this definition: off topic. You don't seem to comprehend what it means.
thing that worries me about AoC PVP is the combat system. Yes, you can choose where to strike an opponent with the little dial thingy, and from that create combos, but I remember watching a dev video presentation where they said that AoC would NOT have any player controlled blocking or parrying mechanics, as the technology did not exist for real time collesion detection between your blade and your opponents blade....
which, from my point of view, means two players will line up and bunnie hop around each other (from AoC Assassin/Rogue PVP vid I saw on youtube) and both will just go through their combo list of different attacks until one person dies.
Which means the game will be gear dependant, as the "skill" will be very little more then a game like WoW. Which means no player looting if it's gear/level dependant.
So, even if they do have a FFA server, it will be for Blood Coins (or whatever they are called) ganking/griefing as the game will be very level and gear dependant.
I'm sure the Guild control of the Keep things will be fun and cool, the hiring of player mercs is genius, but it's still instanced and only at certain times. I'm sure they'll give a bonus to Guild members who have control of a keep, but does this really bring "meaning" to PVP?
War and PVP only has meaning if there are different sides in the conflict struggling to win something. Not win something for themselves like WoW or win something for themselves and their friends (Guild) like in AoC...
but to win something for their people, their race, their army, etc.
Why do you think the idea of Nationalism is so important to a successful and victorious war? Soldiers don't fight for themselves, and even if they fight for their family and friends, it is to protect them from some grand agressor. Another nation or ideology. They fight for country, for king, for their God(s).
"To the victor goes the spoils" only applies when there can be a definitive victor.
And I think the CLOSEST thing we are going to get to this kind of PVP and true War is Warhammer Online because of the RvR system.
What remains to be seen is if there will be a penalty for "losing" the conflict in WAR.
Because without the chance and threat of loss, there can exist no gain nor victory.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by heerobya
thing that worries me about AoC PVP is the combat system. Yes, you can choose where to strike an opponent with the little dial thingy, and from that create combos, but I remember watching a dev video presentation where they said that AoC would NOT have any player controlled blocking or parrying mechanics, as the technology did not exist for real time collesion detection between your blade and your opponents blade.... which, from my point of view, means two players will line up and bunnie hop around each other (from AoC Assassin/Rogue PVP vid I saw on youtube) and both will just go through their combo list of different attacks until one person dies. Which means the game will be gear dependant, as the "skill" will be very little more then a game like WoW. Which means no player looting if it's gear/level dependant. So, even if they do have a FFA server, it will be for Blood Coins (or whatever they are called) ganking/griefing as the game will be very level and gear dependant. I'm sure the Guild control of the Keep things will be fun and cool, the hiring of player mercs is genius, but it's still instanced and only at certain times. I'm sure they'll give a bonus to Guild members who have control of a keep, but does this really bring "meaning" to PVP? War and PVP only has meaning if there are different sides in the conflict struggling to win something. Not win something for themselves like WoW or win something for themselves and their friends (Guild) like in AoC... but to win something for their people, their race, their army, etc. Why do you think the idea of Nationalism is so important to a successful and victorious war? Soldiers don't fight for themselves, and even if they fight for their family and friends, it is to protect them from some grand agressor. Another nation or ideology. They fight for country, for king, for their God(s). "To the victor goes the spoils" only applies when there can be a definitive victor. And I think the CLOSEST thing we are going to get to this kind of PVP and true War is Warhammer Online because of the RvR system. What remains to be seen is if there will be a penalty for "losing" the conflict in WAR. Because without the chance and threat of loss, there can exist no gain nor victory.
1. You can try and bunny hop but you can't swing your weapon when jumping, hopping around decreases your stamina making it worthless. People have tried it at conventions and their comments are here within the first 2 pages of this section of the boards. They are still "toying" with the speed of the assassin.
2. When you take a 'Keep' or own one, this brings considerable benefits for all guild members - see also posts on first couple of pages here - especially the interview ones (like the one from Tarib I wrote up from video(hardly anyone replied)). This and prestige are obvious choices to make it 'meaningful', mmorpg player have some sense of want about them, their experience in the genre is to 'progress' their character. Holding a Keep can increase this progress at a faster rate, for all members
3. You are forgetting the so called "Bounty" system here, which is in place as a cause and effect for griefing/ganking.
4. No real time blocking/parrying does not equal "bunny hopping" - Directional damage does have meaning, manually aiming a spell or when ranging, or even in melee you have to face the person to hit / pull off move to do the best damage. Macros are also worthless in this regard, programming a macro on your keyboard to pull of "combo 1 followed by combo 2" would be pointless as the opponent would of moved out of the way and you will be there swinging at "air".
5. I really have to disagree with your comments about warhammer. GvG and 9 Battlekeeps in the Border Kingdoms promotes Pride.
In a factional system you have built-in friends and enemies. It's just the way the game is designed. People on your faction are your friends (you typically can't attack them at all except in a /duel), and people on the other faction are your enemies. It's a very black and white situation.
In a guild-based or non-factional system the line is not so clear. The guy that helped you out yesterday might take your head off today. Politics and guild drama run rampant. People in your guild today might splinter off and be your sworn enemies tomorrow. Your enemies today might ask to ally with you to take on a bigger foe. You never know what the game will hold for you. It's a much more chaotic/exciting environment.
I want the freedom to choose my own friends and enemies. GvG gives that to me.
There is little to no accountability for behavior in RvR; punks, gankers, and smack talkers can fade into the anominity and safety of their faction. Not to mention leechers and people there for the ride doing nothing to help in a battle… Often such behavior is encouraged in RvR because the enemy is faceless and the consequences are few. No thanks RvR.
I want to choose who my enemies are and not have the game choose them for me. The Border Kingdoms although an instance provide several different mechanics in which there can be many enemies, not just "You Vs Me" I could have several guilds after mine. Who knows whats going to happen, large scale battles in the Border Kingdoms are defined on a "ticket" system - again this shows thought in developement and promote logic and tactics to those 'for' and 'against' the ability to be cohesive with you guild members allows for taking apart the enemy faster. In a realm a bunch of people get together and go fight, in a guild system you know your team mates, you know their strengths and weakness as you play with them all the time. In a realm fight your might be paired up with people you don't know. Working to accomplish and maintain a guild promotes togetherness more, and you see yourself as a working unit with specific goals to do with your friends.
GvG offers more freedom. RvR is repetitive really unless there are more than 2 facets. Once a certain time has passed, the entire regions are reset. There is no long-lasting effect. It just starts all over. AoC's battlekeeps offer near unlimited tactics, you don't have to do the same thing over and over (being a ticket system) in a fight. The same objective on a realm map might by exactly the same each time you do it, in AoC you have to take into consideration 'formation mounted' combat, Rhinos, War Mammoths, Horses all have different strengths and weakness's. Seige engines have to be placed in different locations depending on the enemys or aggressors stance - each time its different. Whats more is your fighting against the same class / same races that might be present on your side, so at the same time you have an advantage and disadvantage, its how you play it out thats different.
In comparison, in a GvG type game, guilds can hold their assets as long as they can hold their assets. They are able to make a permanent impact on the game world itself, shaping it, forming it, contributing to it. - This is AoC’s border kingdoms. You shape your BattleKeep to your own designs - your guild is in charge of placements and fortifications, you choose where to place your seige weapons - You actually build them by your own hands! You own these things because you made them - they arent just given to you in AoC. In warhammer its like here is a city and another city, fight, the winner moves up to the next city and so on and so on, etc etc - did the players make this city or are they just lying around? How can you have a sense of ownership if nothing in it is not made by you.
In an RvR system, I am stuck with idiots. I cannot throw them out of my faction. I cannot kill them, and they are free to annoy me with their childish behaviour. I don’t even get to chose who my "friends and allies" are. The Computer decides for me. And in return I get an ever repeating, yet senseless struggle of trying to compete and be a cohesive unit.
Now you have to wonder how long anyone will play the game when nothing they accomplish means anything because the world resets all by itself, back to the same objectives, the same static infrastructure, fighting the same race over and over - but in AoC your objectives are clear, obviously to WIN, but also to do your objectives and have a high kill count. The 'Ticket' system is genius. Thats "definative" for you, thats "meaning", in a guild environment you can get more cohesive and act as one, in a realm environment you hoping everyone feels the same like a guild with ambition does.
How different AoC battlekeeps be, when the lay of the land has impact tactically in your fight. In a PvP fight in WAR you press the shortcut for Auto Attack - stream off your skills, how easy is that, and how many times have we seen that in other games.... We have already seen rangers jumping 20 times their height in the latest war video shooting at the same time. Directional Attacks in AoC will make PvP much more fun, and ultimately more skill based as the onus of your movement in game is directly tied to you attacking actions.
In AoC you fight no only for your survival but your team mates, in order to progress at a faster rate, in order to all equally share the spoils and rewards. Your guild is your Family, Your Keep is your Land, your not neccessarily fighting just because your all worship good or evil, but for the continuation of everything you have worked for. This are people you chat to, PvE with, Craft with, party with, socialise with in the PvE city, you know them inside out - Taverns, Guild Halls, etc all promote togetherness not to mention guild rulership style - taxation etc - will this "meaning" be in warhammer on this level with only 20% PvE? Not as much as a GvG system i'd say.
Different building in the Keep can only be built by certain prestige classes too, as well as holding additional benefits. In warhammer you seige weapons are just lying around, the hardwork done for you..
These are my thoughts on GvG in AoC, it isn't a stab at war, its a comparison of systems which are both different in a debate that raises questions to meaning.
This are some of the options that you will find only in GvG, factor in the Mercenary into GvG and that gives you a great facet on such a flexible system. GvG is anything but static, politics, alliances, relations all have an effect. In an RvR system you have two sides in the Border Lands for example there is the opportunity for dozens of guilds to present themselves best on the open PvP floor.
Do you get the above options in an RvR system? And these are just Beta screens.
AoC looks like it will come down to zerg guilds vrs zerg guilds. If you aren't in a zerg guild, no reason to do pvp. Mercenaries is an interesting concept but if a zerg guild is holding a keep, they probably won't need ya. And unless you really make a name for yourself, or have a friend on the inside, you might not ever be hired. Smaller guilds might need ya, but smaller guilds will still get steamrolled by the zerg guilds. Once you hit end game, i imagine the only people that would still have a reason to keep playing are the ones in the zerg guilds.
At least with an RvR system, everyone gets a chance to participate, regardless of skill level or guild you are a part of. Less populated realms can still make progress in the war by playing smart and participating in some of the instanced scenarios. It is more balanced for all, and so everyone can have fun, not just for the 'elite' that spend every waking moment logged in and not just for the people that jump ship to the big guilds. RvR might force your team on you but I don't see how that is much different than a game that forces you to join big guilds to participate (productively) in pvp. What I've read on the mechanics in AoC certainly suggests this is what its leading to.
I'm getting pretty up there in years. I have obligations outside of games. I would think most adults do. Seems like the best way to get my pvp kicks is to either join a large guild in aoc or any guild whatsoever in WAR. I've heard the pvp sieges in AoC are scheduled.. as in you are restricted to a window for what hours of the day you can actually participate, and that its chosen by the defender. Since the WAR option seems quite a bit more flexible and in tune with my 'hop on for an hour or two anytime of the day I want and have fun in pvp' desires, I've been learning more towards that. I don't want to be forced into a certain guild or playstyle just to enjoy pvp.
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence. Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
You dont have to be forced into anything in AoC, options are there for you to enjoy seiging whether your on your own, or in a smaller guild. Large guilds can only own one battlekeep, they can't take forts or resource nodes on top. Hence not like Shadowbane where by the big guilds steamrolled through. Different things to own in the BorderKingdoms revolve around different time frames, there is always something to fight over, whether each day, every 2 days and so on. Everything has a turn over time with respect to keep the fighting flowing and to keep competiton rife.
Everything is hand made too, that takes time, your instruments of war are just that - yours! repair, maintain and make.
Anyone can enter the Border Kingdoms at any time. Obviously large guilds might not need to hire Merc's, on the other hand seiging warfare still takes place at other locations for other objectives. Seiges aren't limited to one instance eg the big one - Battlekeeps.
There are PvP levels as well to achieve and prosper in, meaningful if you want to make a name for yourself, there are Merc levels to - available for people hiring to see. You can build any of these up casually at your own leisure. When you goto the border kingdom you go there to fight - two parts, offensive and defensive - simple as that.
Guilds in warhammer as an example might be able to occupy the whole of one side of an instance, as there are only two facets. Their name is either "sneered" or "cheered", they get the blame if they loose - there is no option if all the spots are taken up in that instance by one for a casual player to join straight away, the obligation is solely on that party who filled up that instance with the consequences all on them. In a seige, in AoC multiple people can join in within the numbers allowed for the area, this opens up for massive options on the field of battle for smaller guilds. In AoC there are international servers we can fight worldwide if we want to, you can join a server type with which might conform to you average daily schedule, so if you like to PvP at 4 am your timezone you can get the opportunity to seige if you want to.
Lets just say that seiges in AoC, at the high end, dont happen when people are usually asleep. As people with lives, families and obligations in life, no one wants to be awake 24/7. Seems alright to me as the casual player. So yes AoC doesn't promote being on every waking day, log on, help out, be productive, make it meaningful...
war has plenty of guilds, it even has its own section on the forums, with AoC at least not being in a guild you can still PvP and not risk waiting for a battle, or being alienated in an instance. For PvP to be meaningful it first has to be available.
Sure, I might be able to do a small scale siege to take a resource node or something, but if I wanted to participate (effectively) in anything to do with a battlekeep, I would be forced to join a large guild. Otherwise, I can forget about it. In the end, I'm still being forced into only being able to partipate in a small portion of the pvp options. Whether there are still some options remaining, such as a few resource nodes, doesn't really matter.
I just don't like the idea of being locked out of content based on what guild I happen to be a part of. Way to elitist for my tastes. I can understand why someone already in a large guild wouldn't think this is an 'issue', because he isn't personally affected, but try to think of it from the position of someone that isn't in such a guild.
All I know is, I value being able to participate in all content (eventually), regardless of how many many hours I play, what time of day I play, who I am guilded with, etc.
If there are 10 pvp things to capture, it will tend to be the 10 largest groups that hold them. If there are 20, it will tend to be the 20 largest. You can join together with other groups to capture things.. but in the end you are still being forced into doing so, and you are just becoming that which you are fighting to destroy - a zerg guild. And if you aren't willing to make the choice to create that large guild... well you get the picture.
That really isn't much of a choice in my opinion.
As I said, I would like to be able to participate in all aspects of pvp without being herded into a certain playstyle or guild type. PotBS offers this. WAR offers this. AoC (or should I say, GvG) does not seem to. Which is fine - I don't think it was DESIGNED to allow everyone to participate equally. But it is what this particular gamer prefers.
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence. Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Originally posted by Grunties
Sure, I might be able to do a small scale siege to take a resource node or something, but if I wanted to participate (effectively) in anything to do with a battlekeep, I would be forced to join a large guild. Otherwise, I can forget about it. In the end, I'm still being forced into only being able to partipate in a small portion of the pvp options. Whether there are still some options remaining, such as a few resource nodes, doesn't really matter. I just don't like the idea of being locked out of content based on what guild I happen to be a part of. Way to elitist for my tastes. I can understand why someone already in a large guild wouldn't think this is an 'issue', because he isn't personally affected, but try to think of it from the position of someone that isn't in such a guild. All I know is, I value being able to participate in all content (eventually), regardless of how many many hours I play, what time of day I play, who I am guilded with, etc. If there are 10 pvp things to capture, it will tend to be the 10 largest groups that hold them. If there are 20, it will tend to be the 20 largest. You can join together with other groups to capture things.. but in the end you are still being forced into doing so, and you are just becoming that which you are fighting to destroy - a zerg guild. And if you aren't willing to make the choice to create that large guild... well you get the picture. That really isn't much of a choice in my opinion. As I said, I would like to be able to participate in all aspects of pvp without being herded into a certain playstyle or guild type. PotBS offers this. WAR offers this. AoC (or should I say, GvG) does not seem to. Which is fine - I don't think it was DESIGNED to allow everyone to participate equally. But it is what this particular gamer prefers.
How about people in smaller guilds say of 20 people. They can still try to take a battle keep, not one is stopping them or forcing them. If they can't quite manage it then there is the option there to hire a helped hand. The experience is still offered.
The point you are missing is choice, everyone has a choice, no one is forced. The game doesn't force you to do anything, you as the player are imposing you opinions over the facts. People can choose what they want to do. They have this freedom in AoC.
Forts could easily be 50 vs 50 and resource nodes could easily be 20 v 20. You still are expericing a seiging event, just on a smaller scale.
Why would you assume that every guild who holds a battlekeep is a zerg guild, Zerg guilds rely on sheer numbers to achieve an objective, and not player skill so much, so if having 400 guild members is really any use on a limited battlefield of 75 -100 people.... On the battlefield, both sides can have equal numbers its up to you to fill them. You aren't forced to. You choose to. Option is there.
Zergs could be just as prevalent in an RvR system taking all the spots available for the instanced fight.. What makes you think its any different when comparing numbers at the high end? What makes you think a large guild on both sides in war will constantly take up all the spots in an instance, and you will be forced to wait, or forced to join them? The only difference is single, casual players can join in a fight in AoC, they will have to wait to get in on the next instance in warhammer (what to do in the mean time with 20% PvE?)
There is no Alliance system at the moment.
I mean you have to really ask yourself what do you want out the game? What will make it meaningful to you? If you don't really want to be in a guild then you have to realise you can't own a battlekeep by yourself. The good thing about AoC at the moment is there are probably over 100 guilds already pre established.
With RvR I could be gimped from the start by picking the weaker faction. With RvR in DAoC zerging was just as common as it is in Shadowbane whats going to be different this time around. If players in large guilds in warhammer all party and click go, and go into their instance how long does the single player stand around waiting to participate.
Like I said before meaningful PvP in AoC is from my point of view is listed as my first response in this thread, it has it in, the choice of the player is do you want it at the high end - either as a single non alined player, in a guild of any size, in a mercenary guild all available to the player, or at a smaller scale.
I can't help but feel overall a GvG system offers the player all the familiarities the average gamer is used to and offers more freedom over an RvR system which imo lacks choice. You can choose to do many more things in GvG, the limits are pretty much unlocked. These options giving an edge in defining meaningful PvP.
I'm wondering if theres a possibility of forming a guild that does not have any lands, but keep to a raiding - hit and run theme in PvP. Giving smaller guilds a chance to harry or wear down larger guilds or impede their growth. But then for this to work.. larger guilds will need to have land assets that is not protected within the walls of their own battle keep. Or things such as trade caravans moving from settlement to settlement acquiring gold as they move along. Kind of like AoE's trade wagon, that is capturable.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
Thanks.
I forgot a couple of things for anyone who read the last couple of posts.
Although warhammer online isn't my "cup of tea" it doesnt mean to say that RvR is not any good or the game itself will be. What I wanted to try and put across was the fact that from my own experience and views deep down I prefer the flexibility and cohesiveness of a GvG system as apposed to RvR one. This isn't to say that RvR isn't lacking in anyway to meaningful PvP on the whole, players will have their own objectives too given in a particular instance. For me though bringing meaning to PvP in different ways that only GvG can do is what draws me in more so. I can't really fathom instanced RvR, to me its just PvP, goals need to be persistant in order for it to be RvR related. Any kind of arena/instanced PvP is just that, PvP, not RvR. It's the way of putting PvP in a game and it's horrible and gets boring fast. The problem I forsee with warhammer is if a single guild becomes a Zerg, then again you have to ask how can your PvP be meaningful then?
Alot of people when they hear "Zerg" freak out and think that its all bad, either from own personal experience or that with which they have read, seen or heard. I can understand people continually loosing fights seeing it not as fun at all. People don't want to spend time waiting to fight, but at the same time you also want to feel some satisfaction after having achieved your objective in a fight. Some say Full Loot is the ultimate meaning to PvP, the ability to truly take what you "owned". For me its a mixture of things. Zerging is also about "rushing" your opponent in numbers, in AoC tactical advantage over "Spawn" points will be a crucial factor. The good thing about big guilds going "at it" is the time it takes if both are similarily balanced, making it more satisfying to some.
Few people have the time it might take (couple hours) for something like like this, which is why we see the same thing scaled down to "forts" and the "resource nodes". I can understand this, but again at the high end (keeps) for me its has more meaning in a longer fight, you and your guild went through 90 minutes of back and forth action, in a ticket system each clocking up masses of points on both sides. For the defender if won; the signifcance that you held off such a large foe has meaning too and boosts morale. For the vicor if aggressor, the spoils of war lay infront of you, the benefits would outweigh the time put into planning such an attack meaning the victory worthy and with meaning all within an edge of your seat action. If you lost at least lets hope you could say you had fun! To me a higher level of teamwork and communication is found in tighter groups/guilds.
To me Zerg against Zerg can be fun if the goals need strategic or tactical thinking, something AoC offers at all level of guild size. But the scope for difference is massive. I believe GvG offers more scope for organisation, systems are in place to allow you communicate only with your guild and not the whole server.
In RvR (DAoC) Zergs are Zergs because one realm see's the need in certain situations to use teamwork on behalf of the realm. Teamwork being the optimal phrase, alot of times in DAoC you'll find one realm refuse to work together and go out in solo group format. Sooner or later the Zerg will find them and thats were you get the complaints from. Zerging, solo or whatever type of RvR format you like is fine by me. But seeing as though you are only allowed to own one battlekeep and there is a limit of player numbers in the instance, the term Zerg in AoC would imo be less of a problem than I've seen in DAoC. To be honest RvR in war, I hope for the sake of fans deals with more realm interaction and that players understand the need for "us" instead of "me" at the end of the day, couple in a system that didn't promote ganking like DAoC did with gank ranks.
Great job avery, nice points all put together in this thread! Your points were defently well put together and increases my thought of AoC PvP not being pointless/meaningless.
I was looking forward to war for PvP (Its going to be better, IMHO) But I saw that the RP and craft aspect where going to probably be terrible. Yes, I know the crafting system hasn't been released yet, but Im not holding my breath.
AoC is going to be the "all-around" title. Im even not sure if the combat system is going to pan out the way they want it to. But only time will tell.
I find it kinda funny, I find it kinda sad, The dreams in which I'm dieing are the best I've ever had.
thing that worries me about AoC PVP is the combat system. Yes, you can choose where to strike an opponent with the little dial thingy, and from that create combos, but I remember watching a dev video presentation where they said that AoC would NOT have any player controlled blocking or parrying mechanics, as the technology did not exist for real time collesion detection between your blade and your opponents blade.... which, from my point of view, means two players will line up and bunnie hop around each other (from AoC Assassin/Rogue PVP vid I saw on youtube) and both will just go through their combo list of different attacks until one person dies. Which means the game will be gear dependant, as the "skill" will be very little more then a game like WoW. Which means no player looting if it's gear/level dependant. So, even if they do have a FFA server, it will be for Blood Coins (or whatever they are called) ganking/griefing as the game will be very level and gear dependant. I'm sure the Guild control of the Keep things will be fun and cool, the hiring of player mercs is genius, but it's still instanced and only at certain times. I'm sure they'll give a bonus to Guild members who have control of a keep, but does this really bring "meaning" to PVP? War and PVP only has meaning if there are different sides in the conflict struggling to win something. Not win something for themselves like WoW or win something for themselves and their friends (Guild) like in AoC... but to win something for their people, their race, their army, etc. Why do you think the idea of Nationalism is so important to a successful and victorious war? Soldiers don't fight for themselves, and even if they fight for their family and friends, it is to protect them from some grand agressor. Another nation or ideology. They fight for country, for king, for their God(s). "To the victor goes the spoils" only applies when there can be a definitive victor. And I think the CLOSEST thing we are going to get to this kind of PVP and true War is Warhammer Online because of the RvR system. What remains to be seen is if there will be a penalty for "losing" the conflict in WAR. Because without the chance and threat of loss, there can exist no gain nor victory.
dude you dont play much pure PVP games do you? Nothing is more meaningful then fighting for my guild. nothing. I dont know all those other losers thats in my "nation" I eagerly await the day when the Devs wake up and finally realize we dont care much for lore in PVP.
RvR is absolutely meaningless to me if my friend is accidenly on the other side and we cant play together. to hell with RvR
The problem with how MMOs view PvP these days is there is no reaction to you dying. It's like a RPG Deathmatch. What I mean is when you PvP in the majority of MMO games today you run out.. die... run back out... die again.. over and over until one side wins. There's no penalty for dying in a PvP environment, or at least not one harsh enough to stop the type of zerg that we will be seeing in Conan. What I would like to see is EXP loss on death in PvP & the ability to lose your level if you lose enough EXP. Maxed out EXP on your level 80? But you die 10 times in a Raid and you are back to 79. This would make people think before engaging in PvP battles and would totally change the dynamic of PvP Raids in Conan. This is the best way that I can see to make the PvP meaningful for everyone. This may be far enough (or too far) for most people. But I would personally like to see it go a step further & apply a 5 minute "Resurrection Sickness" if you have to release after you die. This debuff would be negated if you get resurrected by another player. What this Rez sickness would do would cause you to loose double the experience if you die while you still have the debuff. This would slow down the pace of combat & you would actually have a series of battles with clear winners and losers instead of just a huge cluster f*ck of people constantly pouring into the combat area. It would give a chance for the victors of each battle a few moments to reorganize and prepare for the next battle.
someone needs to clue me on on the 'zerg' numbers they think will occur. Realize in FPS games we have no zerg issues and also realize in FPS we can indeed pick the teams we want
now unless you mean a huge, huge force of 300 versus 20. haha, then ya true, true I agree.
What is a pure PVP game? games you play? Which MMORPG is pure PVP with no lore?
Fact is, many games are PVE/PVP combo, with PVP and PVE server to provide varying combos for different types of clients. This formula for making games is the more reliable money making version. Major developers are likely to hug onto this model b/c they are not willing to risk 10M $s on a new formulae. To paraphase your arrogance "dude you do not sit on a corporate board much, do you?"
Games like AoC, games of such scale, are make by companies chaired by board members, who are definitely business man, and maybe a gamer. For them its business first, game maybe. They know that a lot of people care for lore, and they will spend resources to provide lore (maybe unsuccessful, but they will try).
You said "I eagerly wait for the day when the developers wake up and realise we do not care much for lore in PVP". Sadly my friend you are all wrong.
First the "we" you refer to is you, you do not care about lore, many others do, I do. We all pay our share to support the game market, and developers make their version of games trying to woo each and everyone of us to throw them our bucks. You do not care for lore, but you do not have enough spending power to finance a multi-million project to satisfy you alone. A pure PVP zero lore AoC will hardly get off the board room, unless you are the chairman and the sole financer of the company.
I know many PVPers who balance PVP with PVE and enjoy both. Actually the good news for you is, if you want PVP without lore, you need not wait for these multi-million dollar project, go play counterstrike, its crap cheap to purchase, free to play (no monthly) and 100% lore-less. There is no role to play, and absolutely no reason for others to exist apart from shooting you to pieces on sight. That is hardly MMORPG, which this forum and this entire MMORPG.com is all about.
PS: ok I know that the lore in most games are hardly role playing, so do not turn this on me. Blame the developers.
AmazingAveryAge of Conan AdvocateMemberUncommonPosts: 7,188
From the latest "Unofficial Survey" from the official boards:
10. Is the lore of Age of Conan important to you?
Yes.
771
76.04%
No.
243
23.96%
Maybe to some the role of lore in a PvP situation my take on extra meaning, not only for the whole game itself. Eg. "Did you see the way that Stygian's head just rolled off onto the floor"
Also factoring in RP Servers and there is greater scope for more meaning on different levels of gameplay. (I'm thinking general scope of things here)
The poll is just a general snapshot of those interested enough in the game to participate, by no means an overall view, but sure we can get an idea.
What is a pure PVP game? games you play? Which MMORPG is pure PVP with no lore? Fact is, many games are PVE/PVP combo, with PVP and PVE server to provide varying combos for different types of clients. This formula for making games is the more reliable money making version. Major developers are likely to hug onto this model b/c they are not willing to risk 10M $s on a new formulae. To paraphase your arrogance "dude you do not sit on a corporate board much, do you?" Games like AoC, games of such scale, are make by companies chaired by board members, who are definitely business man, and maybe a gamer. For them its business first, game maybe. They know that a lot of people care for lore, and they will spend resources to provide lore (maybe unsuccessful, but they will try). You said "I eagerly wait for the day when the developers wake up and realise we do not care much for lore in PVP". Sadly my friend you are all wrong. First the "we" you refer to is you, you do not care about lore, many others do, I do. We all pay our share to support the game market, and developers make their version of games trying to woo each and everyone of us to throw them our bucks. You do not care for lore, but you do not have enough spending power to finance a multi-million project to satisfy you alone. A pure PVP zero lore AoC will hardly get off the board room, unless you are the chairman and the sole financer of the company. I know many PVPers who balance PVP with PVE and enjoy both. Actually the good news for you is, if you want PVP without lore, you need not wait for these multi-million dollar project, go play counterstrike, its crap cheap to purchase, free to play (no monthly) and 100% lore-less. There is no role to play, and absolutely no reason for others to exist apart from shooting you to pieces on sight. That is hardly MMORPG, which this forum and this entire MMORPG.com is all about. PS: ok I know that the lore in most games are hardly role playing, so do not turn this on me. Blame the developers.
okay just wrote a blog on this subject.
Next, you misread my post. it wasnt directed at you, you dont get it
My point- exposure to pure PVP games will teach these mmorpg newbies that there is nothing more precious then protecting those you care bout in a game. Getting on Ventrillo and gaming with friends. now that's the way to make friends. more personal, more efficient. PUGs get wiped for a reason when they face guilds
thus, you jumped into a 1-on-1 sort of post. has nothing to do with you.
okay so if role play is more important when it comes to PVP try this
pick a totally gimped character for role playing purposes. go try it. next, step into a PVP zone. Yep there are games like that where you can do it. like city of heroes. many Classes are all out gimp in PVP and those classes u never see them in the PVP zones. roleplay != PVP
Next, if roleplay is more important then do this. take a game like WoW. Tell your buddy to pick the other side. now, go ahead and roleplay
roleplay < PVP PVP is about winning period. fighting with good friends and owning. common sense nothing else more to break down. class dismissed
Grow up.
I find it kinda funny, I find it kinda sad, The dreams in which I'm dieing are the best I've ever had.
okay so if role play is more important when it comes to PVP try this
pick a totally gimped character for role playing purposes. go try it. next, step into a PVP zone. Yep there are games like that where you can do it. like city of heroes. many Classes are all out gimp in PVP and those classes u never see them in the PVP zones. roleplay != PVP
Very true. Everyone plays the characters that are the most powerful. Roleplay has nothing to do with it.
Comments
That would be the problem.
Pay close atention to the first paragraph, read it slow...look up words if needed.
we are discusssing pvp in aoc here. If you want to discuss authoritarian command and such, go to some pompous literary forum to discuss that. thanks.
I still don't understand. You want meaninful World PVP? If so, I feel your pain. This would mean that story and pve would have to take the low road in a war scenerio.
My meaning in this is that the PvP in a war environment would have to be what the game is all about. Sacking towns, building alliances...killing off enemies in the hopes of becoming totally dominate. But being cyclic so that new folks two years down the road are able to make a stake themselves. Pve to hold your attention between this.
However, If your speaking of Full Loot...I am kinda against this as the idea stands now. I'm very practical about this. If the game has awesome weapons in it, and it takes any sort of extended time to get these items, of course I would never want it to be LOOTED. But if it could be, That would just mean that these items mean nothing...AND NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE, YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE IT. I don't care if you run with the largest guild in existence, YOU ARE GOING TO LOSE THAT COVETED ITEM. THAT SWORD OF DRAGONSLAYING should not even be weilded because it won't be yours for long.
Even Darkfall with the backpack ready to go in the bank isn't really a good idea to me, but I guess it would work in a game like that where items mean jack. But it's going to be medieval FPS...which is something I can personally do without as I rather play actual FPS's for that.
I think AoC is gonna be just fine.
But if you really want meaningful pvp.....ASK for PERMA DEATH.
Dr MrBloodworth,
You are my new diety. A very nice explanation that requires a minimum of a college-level intellect to comprehend.
And the OP's response clears up my doubts in that area.
Criticism:
First two definitions are:
also this..... 'disapproval expressed by pointing out faults or shortcomings; "the senator received severe criticism from his opponent"
I'd say most posters here follow the above description of criticism......
Whew....how do we get back on topic....
Oh yes...I think PVP in AOC is going to be pretty fun..... but I'll probably still stick with EVE and WAR.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
look up this definition: off topic. You don't seem to comprehend what it means.
thing that worries me about AoC PVP is the combat system. Yes, you can choose where to strike an opponent with the little dial thingy, and from that create combos, but I remember watching a dev video presentation where they said that AoC would NOT have any player controlled blocking or parrying mechanics, as the technology did not exist for real time collesion detection between your blade and your opponents blade....
which, from my point of view, means two players will line up and bunnie hop around each other (from AoC Assassin/Rogue PVP vid I saw on youtube) and both will just go through their combo list of different attacks until one person dies.
Which means the game will be gear dependant, as the "skill" will be very little more then a game like WoW. Which means no player looting if it's gear/level dependant.
So, even if they do have a FFA server, it will be for Blood Coins (or whatever they are called) ganking/griefing as the game will be very level and gear dependant.
I'm sure the Guild control of the Keep things will be fun and cool, the hiring of player mercs is genius, but it's still instanced and only at certain times. I'm sure they'll give a bonus to Guild members who have control of a keep, but does this really bring "meaning" to PVP?
War and PVP only has meaning if there are different sides in the conflict struggling to win something. Not win something for themselves like WoW or win something for themselves and their friends (Guild) like in AoC...
but to win something for their people, their race, their army, etc.
Why do you think the idea of Nationalism is so important to a successful and victorious war? Soldiers don't fight for themselves, and even if they fight for their family and friends, it is to protect them from some grand agressor. Another nation or ideology. They fight for country, for king, for their God(s).
"To the victor goes the spoils" only applies when there can be a definitive victor.
And I think the CLOSEST thing we are going to get to this kind of PVP and true War is Warhammer Online because of the RvR system.
What remains to be seen is if there will be a penalty for "losing" the conflict in WAR.
Because without the chance and threat of loss, there can exist no gain nor victory.
1. You can try and bunny hop but you can't swing your weapon when jumping, hopping around decreases your stamina making it worthless. People have tried it at conventions and their comments are here within the first 2 pages of this section of the boards. They are still "toying" with the speed of the assassin.
2. When you take a 'Keep' or own one, this brings considerable benefits for all guild members - see also posts on first couple of pages here - especially the interview ones (like the one from Tarib I wrote up from video(hardly anyone replied)). This and prestige are obvious choices to make it 'meaningful', mmorpg player have some sense of want about them, their experience in the genre is to 'progress' their character. Holding a Keep can increase this progress at a faster rate, for all members
3. You are forgetting the so called "Bounty" system here, which is in place as a cause and effect for griefing/ganking.
4. No real time blocking/parrying does not equal "bunny hopping" - Directional damage does have meaning, manually aiming a spell or when ranging, or even in melee you have to face the person to hit / pull off move to do the best damage. Macros are also worthless in this regard, programming a macro on your keyboard to pull of "combo 1 followed by combo 2" would be pointless as the opponent would of moved out of the way and you will be there swinging at "air".
5. I really have to disagree with your comments about warhammer. GvG and 9 Battlekeeps in the Border Kingdoms promotes Pride.
In a factional system you have built-in friends and enemies. It's just the way the game is designed. People on your faction are your friends (you typically can't attack them at all except in a /duel), and people on the other faction are your enemies. It's a very black and white situation.
In a guild-based or non-factional system the line is not so clear. The guy that helped you out yesterday might take your head off today. Politics and guild drama run rampant. People in your guild today might splinter off and be your sworn enemies tomorrow. Your enemies today might ask to ally with you to take on a bigger foe. You never know what the game will hold for you. It's a much more chaotic/exciting environment.
I want the freedom to choose my own friends and enemies. GvG gives that to me.
There is little to no accountability for behavior in RvR; punks, gankers, and smack talkers can fade into the anominity and safety of their faction. Not to mention leechers and people there for the ride doing nothing to help in a battle… Often such behavior is encouraged in RvR because the enemy is faceless and the consequences are few. No thanks RvR.
I want to choose who my enemies are and not have the game choose them for me. The Border Kingdoms although an instance provide several different mechanics in which there can be many enemies, not just "You Vs Me" I could have several guilds after mine. Who knows whats going to happen, large scale battles in the Border Kingdoms are defined on a "ticket" system - again this shows thought in developement and promote logic and tactics to those 'for' and 'against' the ability to be cohesive with you guild members allows for taking apart the enemy faster. In a realm a bunch of people get together and go fight, in a guild system you know your team mates, you know their strengths and weakness as you play with them all the time. In a realm fight your might be paired up with people you don't know. Working to accomplish and maintain a guild promotes togetherness more, and you see yourself as a working unit with specific goals to do with your friends.
GvG offers more freedom. RvR is repetitive really unless there are more than 2 facets. Once a certain time has passed, the entire regions are reset. There is no long-lasting effect. It just starts all over. AoC's battlekeeps offer near unlimited tactics, you don't have to do the same thing over and over (being a ticket system) in a fight. The same objective on a realm map might by exactly the same each time you do it, in AoC you have to take into consideration 'formation mounted' combat, Rhinos, War Mammoths, Horses all have different strengths and weakness's. Seige engines have to be placed in different locations depending on the enemys or aggressors stance - each time its different. Whats more is your fighting against the same class / same races that might be present on your side, so at the same time you have an advantage and disadvantage, its how you play it out thats different.
In comparison, in a GvG type game, guilds can hold their assets as long as they can hold their assets. They are able to make a permanent impact on the game world itself, shaping it, forming it, contributing to it. - This is AoC’s border kingdoms. You shape your BattleKeep to your own designs - your guild is in charge of placements and fortifications, you choose where to place your seige weapons - You actually build them by your own hands! You own these things because you made them - they arent just given to you in AoC. In warhammer its like here is a city and another city, fight, the winner moves up to the next city and so on and so on, etc etc - did the players make this city or are they just lying around? How can you have a sense of ownership if nothing in it is not made by you.
In an RvR system, I am stuck with idiots. I cannot throw them out of my faction. I cannot kill them, and they are free to annoy me with their childish behaviour. I don’t even get to chose who my "friends and allies" are. The Computer decides for me. And in return I get an ever repeating, yet senseless struggle of trying to compete and be a cohesive unit.
Now you have to wonder how long anyone will play the game when nothing they accomplish means anything because the world resets all by itself, back to the same objectives, the same static infrastructure, fighting the same race over and over - but in AoC your objectives are clear, obviously to WIN, but also to do your objectives and have a high kill count. The 'Ticket' system is genius. Thats "definative" for you, thats "meaning", in a guild environment you can get more cohesive and act as one, in a realm environment you hoping everyone feels the same like a guild with ambition does.
How different AoC battlekeeps be, when the lay of the land has impact tactically in your fight. In a PvP fight in WAR you press the shortcut for Auto Attack - stream off your skills, how easy is that, and how many times have we seen that in other games.... We have already seen rangers jumping 20 times their height in the latest war video shooting at the same time. Directional Attacks in AoC will make PvP much more fun, and ultimately more skill based as the onus of your movement in game is directly tied to you attacking actions.
In AoC you fight no only for your survival but your team mates, in order to progress at a faster rate, in order to all equally share the spoils and rewards. Your guild is your Family, Your Keep is your Land, your not neccessarily fighting just because your all worship good or evil, but for the continuation of everything you have worked for. This are people you chat to, PvE with, Craft with, party with, socialise with in the PvE city, you know them inside out - Taverns, Guild Halls, etc all promote togetherness not to mention guild rulership style - taxation etc - will this "meaning" be in warhammer on this level with only 20% PvE? Not as much as a GvG system i'd say.
Different building in the Keep can only be built by certain prestige classes too, as well as holding additional benefits. In warhammer you seige weapons are just lying around, the hardwork done for you..
These are my thoughts on GvG in AoC, it isn't a stab at war, its a comparison of systems which are both different in a debate that raises questions to meaning.
This are some of the options that you will find only in GvG, factor in the Mercenary into GvG and that gives you a great facet on such a flexible system. GvG is anything but static, politics, alliances, relations all have an effect. In an RvR system you have two sides in the Border Lands for example there is the opportunity for dozens of guilds to present themselves best on the open PvP floor.
Do you get the above options in an RvR system? And these are just Beta screens.
AoC looks like it will come down to zerg guilds vrs zerg guilds. If you aren't in a zerg guild, no reason to do pvp. Mercenaries is an interesting concept but if a zerg guild is holding a keep, they probably won't need ya. And unless you really make a name for yourself, or have a friend on the inside, you might not ever be hired. Smaller guilds might need ya, but smaller guilds will still get steamrolled by the zerg guilds. Once you hit end game, i imagine the only people that would still have a reason to keep playing are the ones in the zerg guilds.
At least with an RvR system, everyone gets a chance to participate, regardless of skill level or guild you are a part of. Less populated realms can still make progress in the war by playing smart and participating in some of the instanced scenarios. It is more balanced for all, and so everyone can have fun, not just for the 'elite' that spend every waking moment logged in and not just for the people that jump ship to the big guilds. RvR might force your team on you but I don't see how that is much different than a game that forces you to join big guilds to participate (productively) in pvp. What I've read on the mechanics in AoC certainly suggests this is what its leading to.
I'm getting pretty up there in years. I have obligations outside of games. I would think most adults do. Seems like the best way to get my pvp kicks is to either join a large guild in aoc or any guild whatsoever in WAR. I've heard the pvp sieges in AoC are scheduled.. as in you are restricted to a window for what hours of the day you can actually participate, and that its chosen by the defender. Since the WAR option seems quite a bit more flexible and in tune with my 'hop on for an hour or two anytime of the day I want and have fun in pvp' desires, I've been learning more towards that. I don't want to be forced into a certain guild or playstyle just to enjoy pvp.
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence.
Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
You dont have to be forced into anything in AoC, options are there for you to enjoy seiging whether your on your own, or in a smaller guild. Large guilds can only own one battlekeep, they can't take forts or resource nodes on top. Hence not like Shadowbane where by the big guilds steamrolled through. Different things to own in the BorderKingdoms revolve around different time frames, there is always something to fight over, whether each day, every 2 days and so on. Everything has a turn over time with respect to keep the fighting flowing and to keep competiton rife.
Everything is hand made too, that takes time, your instruments of war are just that - yours! repair, maintain and make.
Anyone can enter the Border Kingdoms at any time. Obviously large guilds might not need to hire Merc's, on the other hand seiging warfare still takes place at other locations for other objectives. Seiges aren't limited to one instance eg the big one - Battlekeeps.
There are PvP levels as well to achieve and prosper in, meaningful if you want to make a name for yourself, there are Merc levels to - available for people hiring to see. You can build any of these up casually at your own leisure. When you goto the border kingdom you go there to fight - two parts, offensive and defensive - simple as that.
Guilds in warhammer as an example might be able to occupy the whole of one side of an instance, as there are only two facets. Their name is either "sneered" or "cheered", they get the blame if they loose - there is no option if all the spots are taken up in that instance by one for a casual player to join straight away, the obligation is solely on that party who filled up that instance with the consequences all on them. In a seige, in AoC multiple people can join in within the numbers allowed for the area, this opens up for massive options on the field of battle for smaller guilds. In AoC there are international servers we can fight worldwide if we want to, you can join a server type with which might conform to you average daily schedule, so if you like to PvP at 4 am your timezone you can get the opportunity to seige if you want to.
Lets just say that seiges in AoC, at the high end, dont happen when people are usually asleep. As people with lives, families and obligations in life, no one wants to be awake 24/7. Seems alright to me as the casual player. So yes AoC doesn't promote being on every waking day, log on, help out, be productive, make it meaningful...
war has plenty of guilds, it even has its own section on the forums, with AoC at least not being in a guild you can still PvP and not risk waiting for a battle, or being alienated in an instance. For PvP to be meaningful it first has to be available.
Sure, I might be able to do a small scale siege to take a resource node or something, but if I wanted to participate (effectively) in anything to do with a battlekeep, I would be forced to join a large guild. Otherwise, I can forget about it. In the end, I'm still being forced into only being able to partipate in a small portion of the pvp options. Whether there are still some options remaining, such as a few resource nodes, doesn't really matter.
I just don't like the idea of being locked out of content based on what guild I happen to be a part of. Way to elitist for my tastes. I can understand why someone already in a large guild wouldn't think this is an 'issue', because he isn't personally affected, but try to think of it from the position of someone that isn't in such a guild.
All I know is, I value being able to participate in all content (eventually), regardless of how many many hours I play, what time of day I play, who I am guilded with, etc.
If there are 10 pvp things to capture, it will tend to be the 10 largest groups that hold them. If there are 20, it will tend to be the 20 largest. You can join together with other groups to capture things.. but in the end you are still being forced into doing so, and you are just becoming that which you are fighting to destroy - a zerg guild. And if you aren't willing to make the choice to create that large guild... well you get the picture.
That really isn't much of a choice in my opinion.
As I said, I would like to be able to participate in all aspects of pvp without being herded into a certain playstyle or guild type. PotBS offers this. WAR offers this. AoC (or should I say, GvG) does not seem to. Which is fine - I don't think it was DESIGNED to allow everyone to participate equally. But it is what this particular gamer prefers.
Waiting for: A skill-based MMO with Freedom and Consequence.
Woe to thee, the pierce-ed.
How about people in smaller guilds say of 20 people. They can still try to take a battle keep, not one is stopping them or forcing them. If they can't quite manage it then there is the option there to hire a helped hand. The experience is still offered.
The point you are missing is choice, everyone has a choice, no one is forced. The game doesn't force you to do anything, you as the player are imposing you opinions over the facts. People can choose what they want to do. They have this freedom in AoC.
Forts could easily be 50 vs 50 and resource nodes could easily be 20 v 20. You still are expericing a seiging event, just on a smaller scale.
Why would you assume that every guild who holds a battlekeep is a zerg guild, Zerg guilds rely on sheer numbers to achieve an objective, and not player skill so much, so if having 400 guild members is really any use on a limited battlefield of 75 -100 people.... On the battlefield, both sides can have equal numbers its up to you to fill them. You aren't forced to. You choose to. Option is there.
Zergs could be just as prevalent in an RvR system taking all the spots available for the instanced fight.. What makes you think its any different when comparing numbers at the high end? What makes you think a large guild on both sides in war will constantly take up all the spots in an instance, and you will be forced to wait, or forced to join them? The only difference is single, casual players can join in a fight in AoC, they will have to wait to get in on the next instance in warhammer (what to do in the mean time with 20% PvE?)
There is no Alliance system at the moment.
I mean you have to really ask yourself what do you want out the game? What will make it meaningful to you? If you don't really want to be in a guild then you have to realise you can't own a battlekeep by yourself. The good thing about AoC at the moment is there are probably over 100 guilds already pre established.
With RvR I could be gimped from the start by picking the weaker faction. With RvR in DAoC zerging was just as common as it is in Shadowbane whats going to be different this time around. If players in large guilds in warhammer all party and click go, and go into their instance how long does the single player stand around waiting to participate.
Like I said before meaningful PvP in AoC is from my point of view is listed as my first response in this thread, it has it in, the choice of the player is do you want it at the high end - either as a single non alined player, in a guild of any size, in a mercenary guild all available to the player, or at a smaller scale.
I can't help but feel overall a GvG system offers the player all the familiarities the average gamer is used to and offers more freedom over an RvR system which imo lacks choice. You can choose to do many more things in GvG, the limits are pretty much unlocked. These options giving an edge in defining meaningful PvP.
I'm wondering if theres a possibility of forming a guild that does not have any lands, but keep to a raiding - hit and run theme in PvP. Giving smaller guilds a chance to harry or wear down larger guilds or impede their growth. But then for this to work.. larger guilds will need to have land assets that is not protected within the walls of their own battle keep. Or things such as trade caravans moving from settlement to settlement acquiring gold as they move along. Kind of like AoE's trade wagon, that is capturable.
Nicely put, Avery.
"There is as yet insufficient data for a meaningful answer."
Thanks.
I forgot a couple of things for anyone who read the last couple of posts.
Although warhammer online isn't my "cup of tea" it doesnt mean to say that RvR is not any good or the game itself will be. What I wanted to try and put across was the fact that from my own experience and views deep down I prefer the flexibility and cohesiveness of a GvG system as apposed to RvR one. This isn't to say that RvR isn't lacking in anyway to meaningful PvP on the whole, players will have their own objectives too given in a particular instance. For me though bringing meaning to PvP in different ways that only GvG can do is what draws me in more so. I can't really fathom instanced RvR, to me its just PvP, goals need to be persistant in order for it to be RvR related. Any kind of arena/instanced PvP is just that, PvP, not RvR. It's the way of putting PvP in a game and it's horrible and gets boring fast. The problem I forsee with warhammer is if a single guild becomes a Zerg, then again you have to ask how can your PvP be meaningful then?
Alot of people when they hear "Zerg" freak out and think that its all bad, either from own personal experience or that with which they have read, seen or heard. I can understand people continually loosing fights seeing it not as fun at all. People don't want to spend time waiting to fight, but at the same time you also want to feel some satisfaction after having achieved your objective in a fight. Some say Full Loot is the ultimate meaning to PvP, the ability to truly take what you "owned". For me its a mixture of things. Zerging is also about "rushing" your opponent in numbers, in AoC tactical advantage over "Spawn" points will be a crucial factor. The good thing about big guilds going "at it" is the time it takes if both are similarily balanced, making it more satisfying to some.
Few people have the time it might take (couple hours) for something like like this, which is why we see the same thing scaled down to "forts" and the "resource nodes". I can understand this, but again at the high end (keeps) for me its has more meaning in a longer fight, you and your guild went through 90 minutes of back and forth action, in a ticket system each clocking up masses of points on both sides. For the defender if won; the signifcance that you held off such a large foe has meaning too and boosts morale. For the vicor if aggressor, the spoils of war lay infront of you, the benefits would outweigh the time put into planning such an attack meaning the victory worthy and with meaning all within an edge of your seat action. If you lost at least lets hope you could say you had fun! To me a higher level of teamwork and communication is found in tighter groups/guilds.
To me Zerg against Zerg can be fun if the goals need strategic or tactical thinking, something AoC offers at all level of guild size. But the scope for difference is massive. I believe GvG offers more scope for organisation, systems are in place to allow you communicate only with your guild and not the whole server.
In RvR (DAoC) Zergs are Zergs because one realm see's the need in certain situations to use teamwork on behalf of the realm. Teamwork being the optimal phrase, alot of times in DAoC you'll find one realm refuse to work together and go out in solo group format. Sooner or later the Zerg will find them and thats were you get the complaints from. Zerging, solo or whatever type of RvR format you like is fine by me. But seeing as though you are only allowed to own one battlekeep and there is a limit of player numbers in the instance, the term Zerg in AoC would imo be less of a problem than I've seen in DAoC. To be honest RvR in war, I hope for the sake of fans deals with more realm interaction and that players understand the need for "us" instead of "me" at the end of the day, couple in a system that didn't promote ganking like DAoC did with gank ranks.
Great job avery, nice points all put together in this thread! Your points were defently well put together and increases my thought of AoC PvP not being pointless/meaningless.
I was looking forward to war for PvP (Its going to be better, IMHO) But I saw that the RP and craft aspect where going to probably be terrible. Yes, I know the crafting system hasn't been released yet, but Im not holding my breath.
AoC is going to be the "all-around" title. Im even not sure if the combat system is going to pan out the way they want it to. But only time will tell.
I find it kinda funny, I find it kinda sad, The dreams in which I'm dieing are the best I've ever had.
dude you dont play much pure PVP games do you? Nothing is more meaningful then fighting for my guild. nothing. I dont know all those other losers thats in my "nation" I eagerly await the day when the Devs wake up and finally realize we dont care much for lore in PVP.
RvR is absolutely meaningless to me if my friend is accidenly on the other side and we cant play together. to hell with RvR
roleplay != PVP
someone needs to clue me on on the 'zerg' numbers they think will occur. Realize in FPS games we have no zerg issues and also realize in FPS we can indeed pick the teams we want
now unless you mean a huge, huge force of 300 versus 20. haha, then ya true, true I agree.
ya well death penalty would help no matter what
What is a pure PVP game? games you play? Which MMORPG is pure PVP with no lore?
Fact is, many games are PVE/PVP combo, with PVP and PVE server to provide varying combos for different types of clients. This formula for making games is the more reliable money making version. Major developers are likely to hug onto this model b/c they are not willing to risk 10M $s on a new formulae. To paraphase your arrogance "dude you do not sit on a corporate board much, do you?"
Games like AoC, games of such scale, are make by companies chaired by board members, who are definitely business man, and maybe a gamer. For them its business first, game maybe. They know that a lot of people care for lore, and they will spend resources to provide lore (maybe unsuccessful, but they will try).
You said "I eagerly wait for the day when the developers wake up and realise we do not care much for lore in PVP". Sadly my friend you are all wrong.
First the "we" you refer to is you, you do not care about lore, many others do, I do. We all pay our share to support the game market, and developers make their version of games trying to woo each and everyone of us to throw them our bucks. You do not care for lore, but you do not have enough spending power to finance a multi-million project to satisfy you alone. A pure PVP zero lore AoC will hardly get off the board room, unless you are the chairman and the sole financer of the company.
I know many PVPers who balance PVP with PVE and enjoy both. Actually the good news for you is, if you want PVP without lore, you need not wait for these multi-million dollar project, go play counterstrike, its crap cheap to purchase, free to play (no monthly) and 100% lore-less. There is no role to play, and absolutely no reason for others to exist apart from shooting you to pieces on sight. That is hardly MMORPG, which this forum and this entire MMORPG.com is all about.
PS: ok I know that the lore in most games are hardly role playing, so do not turn this on me. Blame the developers.
From the latest "Unofficial Survey" from the official boards:
Maybe to some the role of lore in a PvP situation my take on extra meaning, not only for the whole game itself. Eg. "Did you see the way that Stygian's head just rolled off onto the floor"
Also factoring in RP Servers and there is greater scope for more meaning on different levels of gameplay. (I'm thinking general scope of things here)
The poll is just a general snapshot of those interested enough in the game to participate, by no means an overall view, but sure we can get an idea.
okay just wrote a blog on this subject.
Next, you misread my post. it wasnt directed at you, you dont get it
My point- exposure to pure PVP games will teach these mmorpg newbies that there is nothing more precious then protecting those you care bout in a game. Getting on Ventrillo and gaming with friends. now that's the way to make friends. more personal, more efficient. PUGs get wiped for a reason when they face guilds
thus, you jumped into a 1-on-1 sort of post. has nothing to do with you.
...
Grow up.
I find it kinda funny, I find it kinda sad, The dreams in which I'm dieing are the best I've ever had.
Very true. Everyone plays the characters that are the most powerful. Roleplay has nothing to do with it.