In one of the battlegrounds one day -- can't remember which BG it was -- we, the Hiberians, were holding the Center Keep and the Albions were trying to take it.
The Midgard guys were harassing us with low numbers at the "front" bridge -- and the Albs were attacking from the bridge closest to their Realm Keep.
We would pound the Middies quickly because they were low in numbers that day, while the main battlefront raged with the Albs back and forth over the other bridge.
We pushed back and forth, back and forth on the bridge for two hours ... two full hours. It was carnage of course, people dropping all over the place, getting rezzed, healers pushing forward to reach the fallen, ranged attackers holding enemies back, melee fighters charging across the bridge or circling around to flank the enemy.
After two hours, the Albs gave up and we held the Center Keep.
It was awesome and totally fun. Everybody loved it.
~~~
And nobody worried or cried about a light death penalty.
Actually there should be spots with NO pvp going on whatsoever. I'm pretty sure in the videos it talks about PVE areas in each of the tiers which provide a safe and relaxing pve experience. So in short: No, WAR is not a big "WoW"-style BG.
To make it clearer, will WAR battles be like WOW BG's battles?
Well since we don't really know enough about WAR's RvR (Realm Vs. Realm - just another way of saying PvP really) then let me tell you about how the guys working on WAR did it in DAoC (bare in mind that I just played the game without knowing the lore and all that kinda stuff... I just like to fight )
There was a place called New Frontiers, and you'd have instanced BG's (anyone on the server in the level-range bracket could join) . In the New Frontiers there were lots and lots of castles (you have a central keep in BG's) to be destroyed and, of course, to be defended. Each castle that you owned acted as a spawn point, you'd spawn down to a castle, join a group of people and all go in search of enemy castles to destroy, take over and stick your guilds name on it (I was never in a guild, but was fun seeing others do it).
Taking over castles was freaking awesome! You'd buy siege weapons such as battering rams, catapults, trebuchets and more to get into that castle. Getting into that castle is a tough job, with your battering ram you'd try to bash down the castle's gate, but with the enemies defending it by tipping boiling hot oil on you (amongst casting spells on you and all that) made it a really good battle. And of course there's always the option to use your siege weapons to blow huge holes in the side of the castles and getting in that way!
Once you were in and managed to fight off all your enemies (and some NPC's), you'd have an "elite" NPC to kill to finally claim it as your own. I also think taking over castles in New Frontiers had something to do with PvE instances, but I really never got that much into it, as I said, I just loved taking part in that.
But anyway, does any of that sound like WoW? I play WoW, so I know for sure it doesn't! Blizzzards idea of taking things over consists of looking at a boring progress bar.
With the talent Mythic has, I trust them to make a really entertaining game that doesn't go stale once you've grinded for your "uber" gear, and still gives you an actual reason to want to PvP (fun, meaningful objectives!!). I'm not saying all this will be in WAR (even if I hope it is), I'm just giving you some insight into the minds of the WAR developers.
That's pretty amazing, what you guys explain about DAOC, so OK let's imagine they do something similar or better.
But still.. was it really fun, in that 2 hour battle, to die and respawn and run to the front over and over again? Maybe it is for a few battles and specially if you win, but I don't see it being too good in the long run.
And why do you say nobody complained about not having a penalty if you had to run for 10 to 20 minutes, as has been said in this thread before? Running for 15 minutes is quite a penalty, so it's only normal they didn't complain about a lack of it.
Actually there should be spots with NO pvp going on whatsoever. I'm pretty sure in the videos it talks about PVE areas in each of the tiers which provide a safe and relaxing pve experience. So in short: No, WAR is not a big "WoW"-style BG.
To make it clearer, will WAR battles be like WOW BG's battles?
Well since we don't really know enough about WAR's RvR (Realm Vs. Realm - just another way of saying PvP really) then let me tell you about how the guys working on WAR did it in DAoC (bare in mind that I just played the game without knowing the lore and all that kinda stuff... I just like to fight )
There was a place called New Frontiers, and you'd have instanced BG's (anyone on the server in the level-range bracket could join) . In the New Frontiers there were lots and lots of castles (you have a central keep in BG's) to be destroyed and, of course, to be defended. Each castle that you owned acted as a spawn point, you'd spawn down to a castle, join a group of people and all go in search of enemy castles to destroy, take over and stick your guilds name on it (I was never in a guild, but was fun seeing others do it).
Taking over castles was freaking awesome! You'd buy siege weapons such as battering rams, catapults, trebuchets and more to get into that castle. Getting into that castle is a tough job, with your battering ram you'd try to bash down the castle's gate, but with the enemies defending it by tipping boiling hot oil on you (amongst casting spells on you and all that) made it a really good battle. And of course there's always the option to use your siege weapons to blow huge holes in the side of the castles and getting in that way!
Once you were in and managed to fight off all your enemies (and some NPC's), you'd have an "elite" NPC to kill to finally claim it as your own. I also think taking over castles in New Frontiers had something to do with PvE instances, but I really never got that much into it, as I said, I just loved taking part in that.
But anyway, does any of that sound like WoW? I play WoW, so I know for sure it doesn't! Blizzzards idea of taking things over consists of looking at a boring progress bar.
With the talent Mythic has, I trust them to make a really entertaining game that doesn't go stale once you've grinded for your "uber" gear, and still gives you an actual reason to want to PvP (fun, meaningful objectives!!). I'm not saying all this will be in WAR (even if I hope it is), I'm just giving you some insight into the minds of the WAR developers.
Man. You've riled me up enough to think about jumping back into Daoc again! But WAR beta is coming up here soon, so that won't be happening.
OP I was comming in expecting to try and write a well thought out flame unlike the few stupid flames you have gotten. Problem is your asking a serious question.
My question to you is with everything everyone hass said, even though you seem to read what they say carefully, you seem to have this pre determend thought that no matter what WAR will feel like WoW when it comes to the mindless battles.
I ask you this. WAR has taken the time to mention steps they are taking to combat zerging. Through various podcasts on character classes ect. they have shown many diffrent ways where strategy will come into play. There will be keep battles, siege weapons (possibly players being tossed into the keeps by catapult), city capture ect. ALL OF THIS is based on you gaining faction points.
With that said how can you think that dieing has no penalty? If you dont think about what your doing, how your doing it ect and just running in and dieing your hurting your faction. Each time you die your giving someone else points for there faction. So unless you have no pride in the faction you choose you will not want to die. The penalty is you hurting your fellow players. However if you dont have any realm pride maybe WAR will not be for you. The whole point to the game even in PvE is to help your faction. All leading up to capturing the other factions capital city. That right there is one major diffrence than WoW's BG's.
Sure there is the ego factor of being the best at pvp like in WoW. Sure you may die and be right back fighting with your comrads (though not confirmed this is the case) like in WoW. However if you think about it even if there is a death pentalty of gold or reduced stats your still going to try to get right back into the fight even at a disadvantage to get 1 more faction point. This has been the case in almost ever game from well before WoW.
The bonus is, every time you kill matters. If you think about it, every time you get killed matters as well. It hurts you in the long run. Say I kill you 15 times to your 1 time killing me (I suck at pvp so it would probably be the other way around but for conversation sake). Just because you didnt loose money, an item, exp, ect doesnt mean it didnt have any affect like it did in WoW. Its the exact oposite. It really hurt you. It means while your not loosing anything valuable at that time, when I am off sacking your capital city and getting special bonuses for doing so (I think I remember seeing things like special crafters ect only being available to the overall winning faction) you will be saying "DAMNIT we need to do better".
I guess what I am trying to say is there will always be similarities. Always. Its the added bonuses to winning and realm pride thats at stake. I never played DAoC. Only RvR game I played was a f2p game which the name escapes me atm. I can tell you though if you ever felt pride for your guild in another game, Realm pride is just as satisfying. Hell it may be more satisfying.
I understand your concerns, and thank you for thinking each reply out so far. It shows me your concern is not just trolling but an actual concern. What I ask of you is to think outside of the box for a bit. There will be similarities to WoW. Just as games before WoW had some of the same feel. The bonuses to me over other games is the extras. The sieges. The keep battles. The fact you can PvP or PvE from level 1 to max. The fact that if I just dont feel like PvPing for a night, my PvE time WILL matter in the overall war. The realm pride knowing I helped Destruction rule the day. All of this to me is what will make WAR more exciting and fun than WoW's BG.
p.s I dont even follow warhammer IP. I dont know the tabletop game one bit. But from what I understand there will be a comedic aspect to the game which helps. After following WAR I wish I would have payed alittle more attention to the table top game.
You are not getting my PvE point. WAR is not friendly from a PvE-GROUPER point of view. See, for some of the BEST loot for group-efficiency, I will have to go outside of PvE-grouping, and that is not acceptable. This is why we need, 1 server, where all the BEST loot is earnable in PvE-grouping, without ever needing to raid or PvP. See, forcing a Care Bear GROUPER to raid or to PvP is a very bad idea, and WAR is doing just that. Just like DAoC say, you have to pick either to Raid or RvR, cannot avoid both. For some of the best loot, you need to kill opponents while RAZING the enemy capital...I have nothing against that, but not on my server! This loot has to be in PvE-grouping as well, on my server.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
That's pretty amazing, what you guys explain about DAOC, so OK let's imagine they do something similar or better. But still.. was it really fun, in that 2 hour battle, to die and respawn and run to the front over and over again? Maybe it is for a few battles and specially if you win, but I don't see it being too good in the long run. And why do you say nobody complained about not having a penalty if you had to run for 10 to 20 minutes, as has been said in this thread before? Running for 15 minutes is quite a penalty, so it's only normal they didn't complain about a lack of it.
I see where you're coming from, but sadly this is just how gaming in general is no matter what game you're playing. I suppose, being a FPS gamer, I'm used to dying and respawning over and over again. But having said that, I could even go back as far as Mario (well I could go further back! ) and say I was used to dying and restarting the level over and over again until I beat it, then you'd move on to the next area.
Every game -MMO or otherwise- will have some repetitive value, but since you're comparing this to WoW then you'll understand that Blizzard try to combat this by simply adding extra tiers - that is a huge mistake to make, imo. Even in their expansions they only offer better stats at a higher level rather than adding something that allows players to do something that has an impact on the whole game. As you know, you'll kill some PvE boss and it'll be some dramatic storyline that may sound great, but you walk outside and nothing has actually changed.
in WAR things will change, you will have an impact on the world when you take over cities, and this for me is where the game sounds interesting. You'll have a sense of achieving something because you and your realm has just wasted an entire city/town, which is now yours. You don't come out of the instance to see everything back to normal, you'll actually have something different - and this is just one part of the game.
Mythic are trying to come up with ideas to stop things going stale, and they seem to be going about it the right way.
The biggest problem with the design I have right now is that in the end, apart from capturing a King or something you do it all for nothing. Nothing is permanent in capturing your enemies city, it all gets undone afterwards.
That's the biggest point where it resembles a BG imo. It may take long to do but in the end it's a neverending selfrepeating tredmill towards the main city over and over again.
That + the scenario play I've seen so far has near instant respawn + a 1min walk to the action or near that.
Could've done without scenario's imo.
Edit: and don't start arguing it's no different in other games. I was hoping for something better here.
1: Everyone seems to think there is no death penalty in WAR. I am going to assume the opposite, and say that the game is still in beta and likely has not implemented a death penalty and/or decided on one yet.
2: Everyone assumes that there is nothing here for PVE people, which if you take notice of all the info out there they state that there is lots of PVE focus in the game from beginning to end. They even state that city capture will open up more PVE opportunities, and there are end game dungeons.
This game is not WoW, and it is not just about RvR.
MMO Vet since AOL Neverwinter Nights circa 1992. My MMO beat up your MMO. =S
The death penalty in WAR is the fact that your not around for whatever length of time it take you to get back to damaging the enemy.
That is a simple but very basic fact of dying in WAR. Being dead means you are not killing enemy or contributing to the cause, which in turn means that the enemy has gained and your team has lost points.
The death penalty effects your entire realm not just yourself. As the more deaths on your side may turn the tide of point gains to the enemy side.
So the penalty is less personal but has a far wider reaching affect.
I'v never played WoW, but I played DaoC for 5,5 years and now I play WAR beta.
Since I'm not allowed to say anything about the beta I can only tell you about DAoC.
The thrill you feel when you partake in a big pvp raid (100-200ppl) is pretty interesting, I don't know how many WoWers could partake in an instance in WoW...but in DAoC you could get close to 1000 players from all three realms trying to protect/attack keeps (these huge battles often led to absurd lagg or even server-crashes but I thought it was very fun anyway.
The 8man-groups(setgroups) often avoided these battles and roamed around to cut off reinforcments, but most of times the whole realm showed up to protect the realm.
Guilds could claim a keep and upgrade it with more powerful guards and defences, the upgrades cost guild bounty points and these points were earned by killing enemies of your realm. When the guild keep/tower became under seige we got a message in the guildchatt and all that could rushed to defend it.
Alliances were very important for communicating threats to the realm, and I'v always feelt intence pride over the alliance i was member of and the work we did for the realm.
I know posting this here is asking for flames, but I really intend to buy the game and I'm honestly worried about this, so I'd like to be proved wrong. BTW I asked the same question at the only-war general forum (with same nick, you can go and check) and in the end it wasn't clear that WAR ¬= Big WOW BG. Specially because of the non existant death penalty that I'm afraid will contribute to a disorganized battle where everybody is dying, respawning, running to the front, dying, respawning... ad eternum and without a clue about what is going on.
Thanks a lot for your replies, truth is I'm a bit less sceptical after reading them, and since someone is in beta and saying what he said, well that's a good sign. Seems that for now we can only hope.
BTW I was expecting much more flames and much less insight, and seeing how the majority of the replies come from ex-DAOC players, that had to be a nice community. I hope it translates to WAR.
You are not getting my PvE point. WAR is not friendly from a PvE-GROUPER point of view. See, for some of the BEST loot for group-efficiency, I will have to go outside of PvE-grouping, and that is not acceptable. This is why we need, 1 server, where all the BEST loot is earnable in PvE-grouping, without ever needing to raid or PvP. See, forcing a Care Bear GROUPER to raid or to PvP is a very bad idea, and WAR is doing just that. Just like DAoC say, you have to pick either to Raid or RvR, cannot avoid both. For some of the best loot, you need to kill opponents while RAZING the enemy capital...I have nothing against that, but not on my server! This loot has to be in PvE-grouping as well, on my server.
You are be mislead by that interview/podcast (can't remember which one said what you are quoting) SOME of the best loot comes from PvP, but to actually get that loot involves PvE. IE you open up the enemy city and fight (PvP) after you have sacked the city and taken control. Public quests open up (PvE) that grant some of the best loot. Now also the actuall sacking of the city will reward great loot as well, and it should. Now you can't get every piece of loot without PvP, but PvP will open up more PvE to get great loot as well. See how they are blending the 2 together?
Now to the OP. In DAoC there is a death penalty called Ressurection Sickness. What this is a run speed, worth/gain debuff. IE if you die, when rezed you gain less realm points and give out less realm points, also there was a speed debuff which made you walk slow(and stacked withits self, died too mucha nd you pretty much stood still). This debuff was inplace in open world and battleground combat. In the battle grounds you safe haven (keep gaurded by super gaurds) was not too far from center controlable keep. So you could get back in the action fairly fast. Maybe 5 mintues. In open world you could stil lget back in the action fast thru the keep portal system (if you control certain keeps you could transport to them instantly). The downside would be the stat debuff (which wasn't anything to really effect anything) less realmpoints.
And also yes, I can remember numerous time attackign and defending keeps for hours that were mass amounts of fun even with the trip back to the fight because of the fact that you could be attacked on your way back, and often were. So while there may not be a glaring death penalty, it wil be enough to amek you not like dieing but not enough to make you want to stop playing, and also enough to make you want to kill the person that got you.
So while I can't give proof, no one can because of the NDA, but from playing DAoC for years. I can suspect they will but something in place to keep the pace of the fight in good meassure, and it won't be like the WoW BGs were you die and are fighting again in 10 seconds.
Also the regen they are probably talking about is out of combat regen, but even a higher in combat regen is good. it makes for longer fights where tactics play a larger role. In DAoC there are 3 different regen types. In combat regen (slow) out of combat regen (moderate) and out of combat sitting regen (fast). The downside to out of combat sitting regen is when you are sitting you have no passive defense (block/evade/parry). What used to be cool was in old DAoC sitting also gave the attacker a damage boost. IE if you caught someone sitting and got a hit off on them it was for higher damage then if they were standing. (they took that out tho, and just left in the no defense)
I hope that helped, but it is just to early to give you proof. Just experience form how Mythic handled RvR flow in DAoC.
The biggest problem with the design I have right now is that in the end, apart from capturing a King or something you do it all for nothing. Nothing is permanent in capturing your enemies city, it all gets undone afterwards.
That's the biggest point where it resembles a BG imo. It may take long to do but in the end it's a neverending selfrepeating tredmill towards the main city over and over again.
That + the scenario play I've seen so far has near instant respawn + a 1min walk to the action or near that. Could've done without scenario's imo.
Edit: and don't start arguing it's no different in other games. I was hoping for something better here.
They have to reset the main city at some point. How would you like it if becuase of a population imbalance that your city was always in control of the enemy. it couldn't be fun, plus it doesn't reset immediately. The game only forces the reset aftera period of times which is not hours, but days, and i believe it is done thru a mass swarm of NPC gaurds that force fully take it back(think keeps on the Gahris server of DAoC) ,so you still have fun fighting off a large army.
OP, don't let the fanboys get under your skin. I played the beta, it wasn't that great, and I will not be investing in Warhammer and neither will all the guys I work with. Half the fanboys on here never even made it into the beta so all they got to go by is screenshots, vids, and interviews. And if you think WoW has cartoony looks, wait till you see War. It's not my cup of tea. Actually Dark Age Of Camelot had better RVR.
Your words are quite meaningless my friend, it all depends on when you played the beta, how far into development the game was, and how many people there were. Also I prefer pictures and videos along with the slander of the game.
Playing: Nada. Played: WAR, LOTRO, EVE, WoW, EQ2, SWG, STO Waiting: TOR
yea... im in beta and i would rather straight up buy warhammer in its very preproduction state that it is in now then any other mmorpg out there right now.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011 -------------------- Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
You are not getting my PvE point. WAR is not friendly from a PvE-GROUPER point of view. See, for some of the BEST loot for group-efficiency, I will have to go outside of PvE-grouping, and that is not acceptable. This is why we need, 1 server, where all the BEST loot is earnable in PvE-grouping, without ever needing to raid or PvP. See, forcing a Care Bear GROUPER to raid or to PvP is a very bad idea, and WAR is doing just that. Just like DAoC say, you have to pick either to Raid or RvR, cannot avoid both. For some of the best loot, you need to kill opponents while RAZING the enemy capital...I have nothing against that, but not on my server! This loot has to be in PvE-grouping as well, on my server.
What would you do with the HUGE chunks of Open Pvp Areas? What would you do with all the Scenario areas? Essentially a PvE only server would only have HALF the content, seems like a waste to say "Oh you can't go to this huge area full of Keeps because it requires PvP to own keeps carry on to somewhere else". Thats a huge mechanic change instead of just a flag switch.
I don't understand how a person can be so opposed to PvP grouping omg yes..You have to Group in RvR to pvp its really no different than PvE grouping your just fighting mobs that actually have brains.
As a EQ1 loving PvE'er I don't really see what your issue is, I guess its just that I enjoy dynamic game play and even EQ1 had some dynamicness since you could go to war with other guilds on the PvE servers. A little pvp never hurt anyone and its not even like they're forcing you since you can sit back and go enjoy the PvE end game content once the PvP combat has opened the gates.
I guess we have to agree to disagree. If you dont' like it then don't play it. There's tons of games that cater to only PvE & the endless mob grind of PvEness of course even on those games you'll find omg..PvP somewhere.
WAR is PvE friendly whether you like how they present it or not. If your just that opposed to consensual PvP I have to wonder why you even play MMOs at all.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
The problem with MMO's today is that all people can do is compare elements of gameplay to WoW. The key malfunction with that logic is that you can't even think outside of what you got in WoW. Asking questions in comparison to WoW shows that you don't have the mental ability to think outside that realm. RvR is not a BG. It is not like a BG. It is not similar to a BG. There are tons of videos that explain RvR. Go to youtube and search for the topic. WoWheads just can't get it. Stop trying to filter games through WoW's gameplay.
This is what worries me. I have watchet podcasts about RvR, just as much as the average guy interested in this game without being a big fan. System looks complex, all those graphics with arrows, points won there and then having an impact here. OK. But, my concern is about the battle itself. I mean, you can have the best system, but if battles are meaningless due to a lack of death penalty, then all the system is meaningless.
For your information I started playing EQ in it's first year, until PoP. Yes I have played WOW too, but you know, so many people have, it's good to know how WAR is different from it, because a lot of gamers want something different, me included.
Ok I think I see what your asking here.
I will try to break it down for you. WoW BG vs DAoC RvR (Only thing even close to what War will be)
WoW BG when you die, you have a very small respawn timer and you get right back into the fight, trying to complete or accomplish set goals. Like capturing the flag or taking over resource points. No real death penalty at all, just die respawn get back to the resource. You also gain nothing in wow bg's except honor (in bg's) and arena points (in arenas) which in turn are used to purchase gear. That is it, that is all wow's pvp is built and based on... gear.
DAoC RvR, When you die, you have 2 options, you either release your corpse, and get sent back to a starting point like a keep held by your realm, or you get resurrected by a player where you are. In DAoC both options hold a death penalty and for a few minutes you are significantly reduced in your stats. On top of that if you release back to your start point, it takes a while to run back to the action and get in the fight.
Also in DAoC when a member of the group or your realm is forced to release back to the start point, this really dampens your realm and groups effectiveness, they are now down one player. If several people in the group die and release, it can turn the tide of a battle.
In DAoC many things are happening in many places at once, they are all usually equally important, small fights all over the place usually end up in one large battle in the end, and they fight over something important, like a keep. The winner stands to gain much if they win, they now have a keep and a tactical advantage in the realm battlefields. They use it as a staging point for future attacks. RvR is steady RvR is constant and RvR has real consequences to winning and losing. You are not fighting for a Merciless Gladiator Robe, you are fighting for the pride and strength of your race/s and realm. Tho it is true you can get back to the fight in a short amount of time, that 5-8 minutes it takes you to get back there may have lost you and your realm the foothold it needed to win, and therefore you eventual loss is a direct cause of your actions.
Had you survived your side might have won.
Now from everything I have seen so far, WAR leads me to believe it will be exactly like this in regards to its RvR. Mythic is making it, Mythic makes DAoC, So it is a natural assumption that WAR will take many elements from DAoC build on them improve on them and make it a better go. I have watched all the movies on WAR so far and many on youtube and other sites showing the way the game is played.
To me it looks like they adapted WoW graphics as in leaning more toward the "cartoony" look as opposed to DAoC's "realistic" look if you wanna call it that, and took the basic principles of DAoC and merged it. So your going to have WoW cartoony look with nice PvE elements which DAoC kinda lacks, and give it DAoC's outstanding PvP aspect and mash them together. It looks to be a hellava game.
But I hope that helps you understand the diff between WoW's BG and a DAoC/WAR type RvR.
The biggest problem with the design I have right now is that in the end, apart from capturing a King or something you do it all for nothing. Nothing is permanent in capturing your enemies city, it all gets undone afterwards.
That's the biggest point where it resembles a BG imo. It may take long to do but in the end it's a neverending selfrepeating tredmill towards the main city over and over again.
That + the scenario play I've seen so far has near instant respawn + a 1min walk to the action or near that. Could've done without scenario's imo.
Edit: and don't start arguing it's no different in other games. I was hoping for something better here.
They have to reset the main city at some point. How would you like it if becuase of a population imbalance that your city was always in control of the enemy. it couldn't be fun, plus it doesn't reset immediately. The game only forces the reset aftera period of times which is not hours, but days, and i believe it is done thru a mass swarm of NPC gaurds that force fully take it back(think keeps on the Gahris server of DAoC) ,so you still have fun fighting off a large army.
Which just illustrates the flaw of the design. Where is the fluency, City gets sacked, move to another spot, set up your base there, have the options to build up certain cities/bases in favor of others due to player activity. Things like that.
There isn't. It's all set, nothing's going to change if people walk into your city, you wait a while or kick them out yourselves and everything is back as it was. Not falling back to another position on the map and making your stand there or anything.
Yes, population balance is a problem I know, that's why a 2faction system doesn't really work well in my opinion.
Can you imagine how much War and Chaos it would have been if all the WAR races would actually have had their own side? Now that's war! and population imbalance would have seemed a much less problem.
I'm sure they are doing the best they can but in my belief, the design is very rigid and static and much like a BG in that regard.
Which just illustrates the flaw of the design. Where is the fluency, City gets sacked, move to another spot, set up your base there, have the options to build up certain cities/bases in favor of others due to player activity. Things like that. There isn't. It's all set, nothing's going to change if people walk into your city, you wait a while or kick them out yourselves and everything is back as it was. Not falling back to another position on the map and making your stand there or anything.
Yes, population balance is a problem I know, that's why a 2faction system doesn't really work well in my opinion.
Can you imagine how much War and Chaos it would have been if all the WAR races would actually have had their own side? Now that's war! and population imbalance would have seemed a much less problem.
I'm sure they are doing the best they can but in my belief, the design is very rigid and static and much like a BG in that regard.
I kinda have to agree from information i've taken in i agree with what you say.
But where you say "set your base up there" i thought that all the cities were static and not dynamic or player made. The cities are just....there... so once you know a scenerio its going to be the same over and over and over again - arent keeps in warhammer just building already there too one location all the time, whether fortified or not, and restrictions in place.?
Which just illustrates the flaw of the design. Where is the fluency, City gets sacked, move to another spot, set up your base there, have the options to build up certain cities/bases in favor of others due to player activity. Things like that. There isn't. It's all set, nothing's going to change if people walk into your city, you wait a while or kick them out yourselves and everything is back as it was. Not falling back to another position on the map and making your stand there or anything.
Yes, population balance is a problem I know, that's why a 2faction system doesn't really work well in my opinion.
Can you imagine how much War and Chaos it would have been if all the WAR races would actually have had their own side? Now that's war! and population imbalance would have seemed a much less problem.
I'm sure they are doing the best they can but in my belief, the design is very rigid and static and much like a BG in that regard.
Lol, I agree that more than two factions would be better for game balance. (2 weaker factions ganging up on the stronger one as a negative-feedback mechanism).
On the other hand your assumption about capitals being static and not worth defending is... misinformed.
The recent scope on capitals is that the older they are the more content they get. So... After your capital is sacked you have to rebuild and defend it if you want to get the most out of it. Additionally the capitals will constantly change their level of advancement based on how long they've avoided being captured so.. one day the High Elf capital could be the oldest/most advanced and a week later it could be in ruins while Dwarves have the richest city. I suspect you'll almost never encounter the "same" strategic situation whenever you log in.
"Capital cities become more ornate, more interesting, and more valuable depending on how long ago it was since they were last conquered. High-end dungeons, important vendors, treasures and items only appear if your side has been persistantly successful in all areas of the game."
This does sound like quite a dynamic world setup to me.
Which just illustrates the flaw of the design. Where is the fluency, City gets sacked, move to another spot, set up your base there, have the options to build up certain cities/bases in favor of others due to player activity. Things like that. There isn't. It's all set, nothing's going to change if people walk into your city, you wait a while or kick them out yourselves and everything is back as it was. Not falling back to another position on the map and making your stand there or anything.
Yes, population balance is a problem I know, that's why a 2faction system doesn't really work well in my opinion.
Can you imagine how much War and Chaos it would have been if all the WAR races would actually have had their own side? Now that's war! and population imbalance would have seemed a much less problem.
I'm sure they are doing the best they can but in my belief, the design is very rigid and static and much like a BG in that regard.
I kinda have to agree from information i've taken in i agree with what you say.
But where you say "set your base up there" i thought that all the cities were static and not dynamic or player made. The cities are just....there... so once you know a scenerio its going to be the same over and over and over again - arent keeps in warhammer just building already there too one location all the time, whether fortified or not, and restrictions in place.?
Ever tought of putting it in warhammer context maybe? This ain't AoC nomad/barbarian fest where you setup your backwater citie elsewhere when the previous one is destroyed. Thank god. The warhammer races have lost very important cities , then taken em back. Sometimes not. It's the license whole philosophy , endless war . Order races have been under attack for centuries. Getting sacked , burned and killed. They eventually retake their cities ,then reconstruct. I don't see anything wrong with that. Only someone always seeing glasses half-empty , like Pheace , would.
It's also a game. As no player would like to see years , decades or centuries go by inbetween taking and retaking. ( Like in the warhammer world lore). They just made the processus playable.
For anyone who just dumb down this game to the point of calling it a "big WOW BG" .Can you please just stay there and play the new expansion/grindfest of WOW?. It would save a lot of headaches in both camps. Using broad similarities is what people that have no arguments would do.
It's pvp , has pve quest component and its campaigns reset ... so it's like a BG . Right? Wow , you're a real genius.
Which just illustrates the flaw of the design. Where is the fluency, City gets sacked, move to another spot, set up your base there, have the options to build up certain cities/bases in favor of others due to player activity. Things like that. There isn't. It's all set, nothing's going to change if people walk into your city, you wait a while or kick them out yourselves and everything is back as it was. Not falling back to another position on the map and making your stand there or anything.
Yes, population balance is a problem I know, that's why a 2faction system doesn't really work well in my opinion.
Can you imagine how much War and Chaos it would have been if all the WAR races would actually have had their own side? Now that's war! and population imbalance would have seemed a much less problem.
I'm sure they are doing the best they can but in my belief, the design is very rigid and static and much like a BG in that regard.
I kinda have to agree from information i've taken in i agree with what you say.
But where you say "set your base up there" i thought that all the cities were static and not dynamic or player made. The cities are just....there... so once you know a scenerio its going to be the same over and over and over again - arent keeps in warhammer just building already there too one location all the time, whether fortified or not, and restrictions in place.?
Ever tought of putting it in warhammer context maybe? This ain't AoC nomad/barbarian fest where you setup your backwater citie elsewhere when the previous one is destroyed. Thank god. The warhammer races have lost very important cities , then taken em back. Sometimes not. It's the license whole philosophy , endless war . Order races have been under attack for centuries. Getting sacked , burned and killed. They eventually retake their cities ,then reconstruct. I don't see anything wrong with that. Only someone always seeing glasses half-empty , like Pheace , would.
It's also a game. As no player would like to see years , decades or centuries go by inbetween taking and retaking. ( Like in the warhammer world lore). They just made the processus playable.
For anyone who just dumb down this game to the point of calling it a "big WOW BG" .Can you please just stay there and play the new expansion/grindfest of WOW?. It would save a lot of headaches in both camps. Using broad similarities is what people that have no arguments would do.
It's pvp , has pve quest component and its campaigns reset ... so it's like a BG . Right? Wow , you're a real genius.
But with AoC its all player made therefore I think it will have more meaning. You hold your city/keep for as long as you can, its not detirmined by a timer, it detirmined by strength and tactics. In warhammer there wil ultimately be a timer on everything, whatever the outcome the whole thing magically resets. You can't craft building, you probably will be able to craft siege weapons (from feedback). Everything else though is static, the buildings are in the same place each time, the lay of the land the same each time.
I think its going to be different from Daoc in a few ways.
It sounds more like an Alliance Battle in Guild Wars, but on a larger map, with quests in there and some control points on the map and a timer. ther difference being just a few cities/maps.
People will play this game and not give a shit about the lore you know, they will just see two sides, simple as that. People will also make WoW comparisons for years to come thats something your going to have to get used to whether you like it or not.
look im still going to play war, its just you seem to have been brainwashed into making out the game is something its not. its not complicated it doesnt need to be dumbed down.
Comments
Just a little walk down DAoC Memory Lane...
In one of the battlegrounds one day -- can't remember which BG it was -- we, the Hiberians, were holding the Center Keep and the Albions were trying to take it.
The Midgard guys were harassing us with low numbers at the "front" bridge -- and the Albs were attacking from the bridge closest to their Realm Keep.
We would pound the Middies quickly because they were low in numbers that day, while the main battlefront raged with the Albs back and forth over the other bridge.
We pushed back and forth, back and forth on the bridge for two hours ... two full hours. It was carnage of course, people dropping all over the place, getting rezzed, healers pushing forward to reach the fallen, ranged attackers holding enemies back, melee fighters charging across the bridge or circling around to flank the enemy.
After two hours, the Albs gave up and we held the Center Keep.
It was awesome and totally fun. Everybody loved it.
~~~
And nobody worried or cried about a light death penalty.
Don't worry. Be happy.
~ Ancient Membership ~
To make it clearer, will WAR battles be like WOW BG's battles?
Well since we don't really know enough about WAR's RvR (Realm Vs. Realm - just another way of saying PvP really) then let me tell you about how the guys working on WAR did it in DAoC (bare in mind that I just played the game without knowing the lore and all that kinda stuff... I just like to fight
)
There was a place called New Frontiers, and you'd have instanced BG's (anyone on the server in the level-range bracket could join) . In the New Frontiers there were lots and lots of castles (you have a central keep in BG's) to be destroyed and, of course, to be defended. Each castle that you owned acted as a spawn point, you'd spawn down to a castle, join a group of people and all go in search of enemy castles to destroy, take over and stick your guilds name on it (I was never in a guild, but was fun seeing others do it).
Taking over castles was freaking awesome! You'd buy siege weapons such as battering rams, catapults, trebuchets and more to get into that castle. Getting into that castle is a tough job, with your battering ram you'd try to bash down the castle's gate, but with the enemies defending it by tipping boiling hot oil on you (amongst casting spells on you and all that) made it a really good battle. And of course there's always the option to use your siege weapons to blow huge holes in the side of the castles and getting in that way!
Once you were in and managed to fight off all your enemies (and some NPC's), you'd have an "elite" NPC to kill to finally claim it as your own. I also think taking over castles in New Frontiers had something to do with PvE instances, but I really never got that much into it, as I said, I just loved taking part in that.
But anyway, does any of that sound like WoW? I play WoW, so I know for sure it doesn't! Blizzzards idea of taking things over consists of looking at a boring progress bar.
With the talent Mythic has, I trust them to make a really entertaining game that doesn't go stale once you've grinded for your "uber" gear, and still gives you an actual reason to want to PvP (fun, meaningful objectives!!). I'm not saying all this will be in WAR (even if I hope it is), I'm just giving you some insight into the minds of the WAR developers.
-iCeh
That's pretty amazing, what you guys explain about DAOC, so OK let's imagine they do something similar or better.
But still.. was it really fun, in that 2 hour battle, to die and respawn and run to the front over and over again? Maybe it is for a few battles and specially if you win, but I don't see it being too good in the long run.
And why do you say nobody complained about not having a penalty if you had to run for 10 to 20 minutes, as has been said in this thread before? Running for 15 minutes is quite a penalty, so it's only normal they didn't complain about a lack of it.
To make it clearer, will WAR battles be like WOW BG's battles?
Well since we don't really know enough about WAR's RvR (Realm Vs. Realm - just another way of saying PvP really) then let me tell you about how the guys working on WAR did it in DAoC (bare in mind that I just played the game without knowing the lore and all that kinda stuff... I just like to fight
)
There was a place called New Frontiers, and you'd have instanced BG's (anyone on the server in the level-range bracket could join) . In the New Frontiers there were lots and lots of castles (you have a central keep in BG's) to be destroyed and, of course, to be defended. Each castle that you owned acted as a spawn point, you'd spawn down to a castle, join a group of people and all go in search of enemy castles to destroy, take over and stick your guilds name on it (I was never in a guild, but was fun seeing others do it).
Taking over castles was freaking awesome! You'd buy siege weapons such as battering rams, catapults, trebuchets and more to get into that castle. Getting into that castle is a tough job, with your battering ram you'd try to bash down the castle's gate, but with the enemies defending it by tipping boiling hot oil on you (amongst casting spells on you and all that) made it a really good battle. And of course there's always the option to use your siege weapons to blow huge holes in the side of the castles and getting in that way!
Once you were in and managed to fight off all your enemies (and some NPC's), you'd have an "elite" NPC to kill to finally claim it as your own. I also think taking over castles in New Frontiers had something to do with PvE instances, but I really never got that much into it, as I said, I just loved taking part in that.
But anyway, does any of that sound like WoW? I play WoW, so I know for sure it doesn't! Blizzzards idea of taking things over consists of looking at a boring progress bar.
With the talent Mythic has, I trust them to make a really entertaining game that doesn't go stale once you've grinded for your "uber" gear, and still gives you an actual reason to want to PvP (fun, meaningful objectives!!). I'm not saying all this will be in WAR (even if I hope it is), I'm just giving you some insight into the minds of the WAR developers.
Man. You've riled me up enough to think about jumping back into Daoc again! But WAR beta is coming up here soon, so that won't be happening.
OP I was comming in expecting to try and write a well thought out flame unlike the few stupid flames you have gotten. Problem is your asking a serious question.
My question to you is with everything everyone hass said, even though you seem to read what they say carefully, you seem to have this pre determend thought that no matter what WAR will feel like WoW when it comes to the mindless battles.
I ask you this. WAR has taken the time to mention steps they are taking to combat zerging. Through various podcasts on character classes ect. they have shown many diffrent ways where strategy will come into play. There will be keep battles, siege weapons (possibly players being tossed into the keeps by catapult), city capture ect. ALL OF THIS is based on you gaining faction points.
With that said how can you think that dieing has no penalty? If you dont think about what your doing, how your doing it ect and just running in and dieing your hurting your faction. Each time you die your giving someone else points for there faction. So unless you have no pride in the faction you choose you will not want to die. The penalty is you hurting your fellow players. However if you dont have any realm pride maybe WAR will not be for you. The whole point to the game even in PvE is to help your faction. All leading up to capturing the other factions capital city. That right there is one major diffrence than WoW's BG's.
Sure there is the ego factor of being the best at pvp like in WoW. Sure you may die and be right back fighting with your comrads (though not confirmed this is the case) like in WoW. However if you think about it even if there is a death pentalty of gold or reduced stats your still going to try to get right back into the fight even at a disadvantage to get 1 more faction point. This has been the case in almost ever game from well before WoW.
The bonus is, every time you kill matters. If you think about it, every time you get killed matters as well. It hurts you in the long run. Say I kill you 15 times to your 1 time killing me (I suck at pvp so it would probably be the other way around but for conversation sake). Just because you didnt loose money, an item, exp, ect doesnt mean it didnt have any affect like it did in WoW. Its the exact oposite. It really hurt you. It means while your not loosing anything valuable at that time, when I am off sacking your capital city and getting special bonuses for doing so (I think I remember seeing things like special crafters ect only being available to the overall winning faction) you will be saying "DAMNIT we need to do better".
I guess what I am trying to say is there will always be similarities. Always. Its the added bonuses to winning and realm pride thats at stake. I never played DAoC. Only RvR game I played was a f2p game which the name escapes me atm. I can tell you though if you ever felt pride for your guild in another game, Realm pride is just as satisfying. Hell it may be more satisfying.
I understand your concerns, and thank you for thinking each reply out so far. It shows me your concern is not just trolling but an actual concern. What I ask of you is to think outside of the box for a bit. There will be similarities to WoW. Just as games before WoW had some of the same feel. The bonuses to me over other games is the extras. The sieges. The keep battles. The fact you can PvP or PvE from level 1 to max. The fact that if I just dont feel like PvPing for a night, my PvE time WILL matter in the overall war. The realm pride knowing I helped Destruction rule the day. All of this to me is what will make WAR more exciting and fun than WoW's BG.
p.s I dont even follow warhammer IP. I dont know the tabletop game one bit. But from what I understand there will be a comedic aspect to the game which helps. After following WAR I wish I would have payed alittle more attention to the table top game.
ElvenAngel,
PvP-wise WAR seem to be amazing.
You are not getting my PvE point. WAR is not friendly from a PvE-GROUPER point of view. See, for some of the BEST loot for group-efficiency, I will have to go outside of PvE-grouping, and that is not acceptable. This is why we need, 1 server, where all the BEST loot is earnable in PvE-grouping, without ever needing to raid or PvP. See, forcing a Care Bear GROUPER to raid or to PvP is a very bad idea, and WAR is doing just that. Just like DAoC say, you have to pick either to Raid or RvR, cannot avoid both. For some of the best loot, you need to kill opponents while RAZING the enemy capital...I have nothing against that, but not on my server! This loot has to be in PvE-grouping as well, on my server.
- "If I understand you well, you are telling me until next time. " - Ren
I see where you're coming from, but sadly this is just how gaming in general is no matter what game you're playing. I suppose, being a FPS gamer, I'm used to dying and respawning over and over again. But having said that, I could even go back as far as Mario (well I could go further back!
) and say I was used to dying and restarting the level over and over again until I beat it, then you'd move on to the next area.
Every game -MMO or otherwise- will have some repetitive value, but since you're comparing this to WoW then you'll understand that Blizzard try to combat this by simply adding extra tiers - that is a huge mistake to make, imo. Even in their expansions they only offer better stats at a higher level rather than adding something that allows players to do something that has an impact on the whole game. As you know, you'll kill some PvE boss and it'll be some dramatic storyline that may sound great, but you walk outside and nothing has actually changed.
in WAR things will change, you will have an impact on the world when you take over cities, and this for me is where the game sounds interesting. You'll have a sense of achieving something because you and your realm has just wasted an entire city/town, which is now yours. You don't come out of the instance to see everything back to normal, you'll actually have something different - and this is just one part of the game.
Mythic are trying to come up with ideas to stop things going stale, and they seem to be going about it the right way.
-iCeh
The biggest problem with the design I have right now is that in the end, apart from capturing a King or something you do it all for nothing. Nothing is permanent in capturing your enemies city, it all gets undone afterwards.
That's the biggest point where it resembles a BG imo. It may take long to do but in the end it's a neverending selfrepeating tredmill towards the main city over and over again.
That + the scenario play I've seen so far has near instant respawn + a 1min walk to the action or near that.
Could've done without scenario's imo.
Edit: and don't start arguing it's no different in other games. I was hoping for something better here.
Two things I've noticed in this thread so far:
1: Everyone seems to think there is no death penalty in WAR. I am going to assume the opposite, and say that the game is still in beta and likely has not implemented a death penalty and/or decided on one yet.
2: Everyone assumes that there is nothing here for PVE people, which if you take notice of all the info out there they state that there is lots of PVE focus in the game from beginning to end. They even state that city capture will open up more PVE opportunities, and there are end game dungeons.
This game is not WoW, and it is not just about RvR.
MMO Vet since AOL Neverwinter Nights circa 1992. My MMO beat up your MMO. =S
Its really quite simple...
The death penalty in WAR is the fact that your not around for whatever length of time it take you to get back to damaging the enemy.
That is a simple but very basic fact of dying in WAR. Being dead means you are not killing enemy or contributing to the cause, which in turn means that the enemy has gained and your team has lost points.
The death penalty effects your entire realm not just yourself. As the more deaths on your side may turn the tide of point gains to the enemy side.
So the penalty is less personal but has a far wider reaching affect.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
I'v never played WoW, but I played DaoC for 5,5 years and now I play WAR beta.
Since I'm not allowed to say anything about the beta I can only tell you about DAoC.
The thrill you feel when you partake in a big pvp raid (100-200ppl) is pretty interesting, I don't know how many WoWers could partake in an instance in WoW...but in DAoC you could get close to 1000 players from all three realms trying to protect/attack keeps (these huge battles often led to absurd lagg or even server-crashes but I thought it was very fun anyway.
The 8man-groups(setgroups) often avoided these battles and roamed around to cut off reinforcments, but most of times the whole realm showed up to protect the realm.
Guilds could claim a keep and upgrade it with more powerful guards and defences, the upgrades cost guild bounty points and these points were earned by killing enemies of your realm. When the guild keep/tower became under seige we got a message in the guildchatt and all that could rushed to defend it.
Alliances were very important for communicating threats to the realm, and I'v always feelt intence pride over the alliance i was member of and the work we did for the realm.
I don't think wow have these kind of features...
Oh how I miss DAoC, and how I can't wait to experience the RvR in Warhammer.
You're bringing back old memories Ogrelin.
Thanks a lot for your replies, truth is I'm a bit less sceptical after reading them, and since someone is in beta and saying what he said, well that's a good sign. Seems that for now we can only hope.
BTW I was expecting much more flames and much less insight, and seeing how the majority of the replies come from ex-DAOC players, that had to be a nice community. I hope it translates to WAR.
Now to the OP. In DAoC there is a death penalty called Ressurection Sickness. What this is a run speed, worth/gain debuff. IE if you die, when rezed you gain less realm points and give out less realm points, also there was a speed debuff which made you walk slow(and stacked withits self, died too mucha nd you pretty much stood still). This debuff was inplace in open world and battleground combat. In the battle grounds you safe haven (keep gaurded by super gaurds) was not too far from center controlable keep. So you could get back in the action fairly fast. Maybe 5 mintues. In open world you could stil lget back in the action fast thru the keep portal system (if you control certain keeps you could transport to them instantly). The downside would be the stat debuff (which wasn't anything to really effect anything) less realmpoints.
And also yes, I can remember numerous time attackign and defending keeps for hours that were mass amounts of fun even with the trip back to the fight because of the fact that you could be attacked on your way back, and often were. So while there may not be a glaring death penalty, it wil be enough to amek you not like dieing but not enough to make you want to stop playing, and also enough to make you want to kill the person that got you.
So while I can't give proof, no one can because of the NDA, but from playing DAoC for years. I can suspect they will but something in place to keep the pace of the fight in good meassure, and it won't be like the WoW BGs were you die and are fighting again in 10 seconds.
Also the regen they are probably talking about is out of combat regen, but even a higher in combat regen is good. it makes for longer fights where tactics play a larger role. In DAoC there are 3 different regen types. In combat regen (slow) out of combat regen (moderate) and out of combat sitting regen (fast). The downside to out of combat sitting regen is when you are sitting you have no passive defense (block/evade/parry). What used to be cool was in old DAoC sitting also gave the attacker a damage boost. IE if you caught someone sitting and got a hit off on them it was for higher damage then if they were standing. (they took that out tho, and just left in the no defense)
I hope that helped, but it is just to early to give you proof. Just experience form how Mythic handled RvR flow in DAoC.
They have to reset the main city at some point. How would you like it if becuase of a population imbalance that your city was always in control of the enemy. it couldn't be fun, plus it doesn't reset immediately. The game only forces the reset aftera period of times which is not hours, but days, and i believe it is done thru a mass swarm of NPC gaurds that force fully take it back(think keeps on the Gahris server of DAoC) ,so you still have fun fighting off a large army.
Your words are quite meaningless my friend, it all depends on when you played the beta, how far into development the game was, and how many people there were. Also I prefer pictures and videos along with the slander of the game.
Playing: Nada.
Played: WAR, LOTRO, EVE, WoW, EQ2, SWG, STO
Waiting: TOR
yea... im in beta and i would rather straight up buy warhammer in its very preproduction state that it is in now then any other mmorpg out there right now.
East Carolina University, Computer Science BS, 2011
--------------------
Current game: DAOC
Games played and quit: L2, PlanetSide, RF Online, GuildWars, SWG, COH/COV, Vanguard, LOTRO, WoW, WW2 Online, FFXI, Auto-Assault, EVE Online, ShadowBane, RYL, Rappelz, Last Chaos, Myst Online, POTBS, EQ2, Warhammer Online, AoC, Aion, Champions Online, Star Trek Online, Allods, Darkfall.
Waiting on: Earthrise
Names: Citio, Goldie, Sportacus
What would you do with the HUGE chunks of Open Pvp Areas? What would you do with all the Scenario areas? Essentially a PvE only server would only have HALF the content, seems like a waste to say "Oh you can't go to this huge area full of Keeps because it requires PvP to own keeps carry on to somewhere else". Thats a huge mechanic change instead of just a flag switch.
I don't understand how a person can be so opposed to PvP grouping omg yes..You have to Group in RvR to pvp its really no different than PvE grouping your just fighting mobs that actually have brains.
As a EQ1 loving PvE'er I don't really see what your issue is, I guess its just that I enjoy dynamic game play and even EQ1 had some dynamicness since you could go to war with other guilds on the PvE servers. A little pvp never hurt anyone and its not even like they're forcing you since you can sit back and go enjoy the PvE end game content once the PvP combat has opened the gates.
I guess we have to agree to disagree. If you dont' like it then don't play it. There's tons of games that cater to only PvE & the endless mob grind of PvEness of course even on those games you'll find omg..PvP somewhere.
WAR is PvE friendly whether you like how they present it or not. If your just that opposed to consensual PvP I have to wonder why you even play MMOs at all.
Please Refer to Doom Cat with all conspiracies & evil corporation complaints. He'll give you the simple explination of..WE"RE ALL DOOMED!
This is what worries me. I have watchet podcasts about RvR, just as much as the average guy interested in this game without being a big fan. System looks complex, all those graphics with arrows, points won there and then having an impact here. OK. But, my concern is about the battle itself. I mean, you can have the best system, but if battles are meaningless due to a lack of death penalty, then all the system is meaningless.For your information I started playing EQ in it's first year, until PoP. Yes I have played WOW too, but you know, so many people have, it's good to know how WAR is different from it, because a lot of gamers want something different, me included.
Ok I think I see what your asking here.
I will try to break it down for you. WoW BG vs DAoC RvR (Only thing even close to what War will be)
WoW BG when you die, you have a very small respawn timer and you get right back into the fight, trying to complete or accomplish set goals. Like capturing the flag or taking over resource points. No real death penalty at all, just die respawn get back to the resource. You also gain nothing in wow bg's except honor (in bg's) and arena points (in arenas) which in turn are used to purchase gear. That is it, that is all wow's pvp is built and based on... gear.
DAoC RvR, When you die, you have 2 options, you either release your corpse, and get sent back to a starting point like a keep held by your realm, or you get resurrected by a player where you are. In DAoC both options hold a death penalty and for a few minutes you are significantly reduced in your stats. On top of that if you release back to your start point, it takes a while to run back to the action and get in the fight.
Also in DAoC when a member of the group or your realm is forced to release back to the start point, this really dampens your realm and groups effectiveness, they are now down one player. If several people in the group die and release, it can turn the tide of a battle.
In DAoC many things are happening in many places at once, they are all usually equally important, small fights all over the place usually end up in one large battle in the end, and they fight over something important, like a keep. The winner stands to gain much if they win, they now have a keep and a tactical advantage in the realm battlefields. They use it as a staging point for future attacks. RvR is steady RvR is constant and RvR has real consequences to winning and losing. You are not fighting for a Merciless Gladiator Robe, you are fighting for the pride and strength of your race/s and realm. Tho it is true you can get back to the fight in a short amount of time, that 5-8 minutes it takes you to get back there may have lost you and your realm the foothold it needed to win, and therefore you eventual loss is a direct cause of your actions.
Had you survived your side might have won.
Now from everything I have seen so far, WAR leads me to believe it will be exactly like this in regards to its RvR. Mythic is making it, Mythic makes DAoC, So it is a natural assumption that WAR will take many elements from DAoC build on them improve on them and make it a better go. I have watched all the movies on WAR so far and many on youtube and other sites showing the way the game is played.
To me it looks like they adapted WoW graphics as in leaning more toward the "cartoony" look as opposed to DAoC's "realistic" look if you wanna call it that, and took the basic principles of DAoC and merged it. So your going to have WoW cartoony look with nice PvE elements which DAoC kinda lacks, and give it DAoC's outstanding PvP aspect and mash them together. It looks to be a hellava game.
But I hope that helps you understand the diff between WoW's BG and a DAoC/WAR type RvR.
They have to reset the main city at some point. How would you like it if becuase of a population imbalance that your city was always in control of the enemy. it couldn't be fun, plus it doesn't reset immediately. The game only forces the reset aftera period of times which is not hours, but days, and i believe it is done thru a mass swarm of NPC gaurds that force fully take it back(think keeps on the Gahris server of DAoC) ,so you still have fun fighting off a large army.
Which just illustrates the flaw of the design. Where is the fluency, City gets sacked, move to another spot, set up your base there, have the options to build up certain cities/bases in favor of others due to player activity. Things like that.
There isn't. It's all set, nothing's going to change if people walk into your city, you wait a while or kick them out yourselves and everything is back as it was. Not falling back to another position on the map and making your stand there or anything.
Yes, population balance is a problem I know, that's why a 2faction system doesn't really work well in my opinion.
Can you imagine how much War and Chaos it would have been if all the WAR races would actually have had their own side? Now that's war! and population imbalance would have seemed a much less problem.
I'm sure they are doing the best they can but in my belief, the design is very rigid and static and much like a BG in that regard.
But where you say "set your base up there" i thought that all the cities were static and not dynamic or player made. The cities are just....there... so once you know a scenerio its going to be the same over and over and over again - arent keeps in warhammer just building already there too one location all the time, whether fortified or not, and restrictions in place.?
Lol, I agree that more than two factions would be better for game balance. (2 weaker factions ganging up on the stronger one as a negative-feedback mechanism).
On the other hand your assumption about capitals being static and not worth defending is... misinformed.
The recent scope on capitals is that the older they are the more content they get. So... After your capital is sacked you have to rebuild and defend it if you want to get the most out of it. Additionally the capitals will constantly change their level of advancement based on how long they've avoided being captured so.. one day the High Elf capital could be the oldest/most advanced and a week later it could be in ruins while Dwarves have the richest city. I suspect you'll almost never encounter the "same" strategic situation whenever you log in.
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/163778
"Capital cities become more ornate, more interesting, and more valuable depending on how long ago it was since they were last conquered. High-end dungeons, important vendors, treasures and items only appear if your side has been persistantly successful in all areas of the game."
This does sound like quite a dynamic world setup to me.
I kinda have to agree from information i've taken in i agree with what you say.But where you say "set your base up there" i thought that all the cities were static and not dynamic or player made. The cities are just....there... so once you know a scenerio its going to be the same over and over and over again - arent keeps in warhammer just building already there too one location all the time, whether fortified or not, and restrictions in place.?
Ever tought of putting it in warhammer context maybe? This ain't AoC nomad/barbarian fest where you setup your backwater citie elsewhere when the previous one is destroyed. Thank god. The warhammer races have lost very important cities , then taken em back. Sometimes not. It's the license whole philosophy , endless war . Order races have been under attack for centuries. Getting sacked , burned and killed. They eventually retake their cities ,then reconstruct. I don't see anything wrong with that. Only someone always seeing glasses half-empty , like Pheace , would.
It's also a game. As no player would like to see years , decades or centuries go by inbetween taking and retaking. ( Like in the warhammer world lore). They just made the processus playable.
For anyone who just dumb down this game to the point of calling it a "big WOW BG" .Can you please just stay there and play the new expansion/grindfest of WOW?. It would save a lot of headaches in both camps. Using broad similarities is what people that have no arguments would do.
It's pvp , has pve quest component and its campaigns reset ... so it's like a BG . Right? Wow , you're a real genius.
http://revolutionwar.guildlaunch.com/
But where you say "set your base up there" i thought that all the cities were static and not dynamic or player made. The cities are just....there... so once you know a scenerio its going to be the same over and over and over again - arent keeps in warhammer just building already there too one location all the time, whether fortified or not, and restrictions in place.?
Ever tought of putting it in warhammer context maybe? This ain't AoC nomad/barbarian fest where you setup your backwater citie elsewhere when the previous one is destroyed. Thank god. The warhammer races have lost very important cities , then taken em back. Sometimes not. It's the license whole philosophy , endless war . Order races have been under attack for centuries. Getting sacked , burned and killed. They eventually retake their cities ,then reconstruct. I don't see anything wrong with that. Only someone always seeing glasses half-empty , like Pheace , would.
It's also a game. As no player would like to see years , decades or centuries go by inbetween taking and retaking. ( Like in the warhammer world lore). They just made the processus playable.
For anyone who just dumb down this game to the point of calling it a "big WOW BG" .Can you please just stay there and play the new expansion/grindfest of WOW?. It would save a lot of headaches in both camps. Using broad similarities is what people that have no arguments would do.
It's pvp , has pve quest component and its campaigns reset ... so it's like a BG . Right? Wow , you're a real genius.
But with AoC its all player made therefore I think it will have more meaning. You hold your city/keep for as long as you can, its not detirmined by a timer, it detirmined by strength and tactics. In warhammer there wil ultimately be a timer on everything, whatever the outcome the whole thing magically resets. You can't craft building, you probably will be able to craft siege weapons (from feedback). Everything else though is static, the buildings are in the same place each time, the lay of the land the same each time.
I think its going to be different from Daoc in a few ways.
It sounds more like an Alliance Battle in Guild Wars, but on a larger map, with quests in there and some control points on the map and a timer. ther difference being just a few cities/maps.
People will play this game and not give a shit about the lore you know, they will just see two sides, simple as that. People will also make WoW comparisons for years to come thats something your going to have to get used to whether you like it or not.
look im still going to play war, its just you seem to have been brainwashed into making out the game is something its not. its not complicated it doesnt need to be dumbed down.