Originally posted by Apraxis Will the world pvp like Alterac Vally? No, you will not have a death penalty, but you will(if not rezzed from one your team mates in the battle, which also some disadvanteges.. like no active buffs, not full health.. and the healer will just have some time to rezz you, and it is not really cheap to do so) die, you will respawn in the warcamp of your realm outside of the contested area.. and withit you have to run back to your actual battle, which results in a) 10+ minute run without buffs, without allys
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.
But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Ok. Where i got the information. I got it from some beta leakers. What did i got from them?
That you spawn at the warcamp, which are outside of the contested areas(outside the rvr zones)..(and i guess you could find this information even elsewhere) the hassle of running back without allies and buffs is well.. just a educated guess and in comparation to my experience with DAoC. And most of the time you will not run alone back, and instead of that, just wait that your group come to you, and pick you up,, or respawn at the same place.
About the time.. well, it is another educated guess.. which depends of the size of the contestet area(the size differs from tier1(smallest) to tier4(hugest) and this information is offical available), and where your group actually fight. How large are the contested area? Hmm.. i dont know exactly at the moment.. i can slightly remember somthing like "you need around 30 mins to run from one end to the other".. but i cant remember, where i got this information, or even if it is true, or just a speculation. Maybe i should ask someone, who knows it exactly, should i?
everything comes full circle, since the original warcraft could be said to be a ripoff from the ideas and visual imagery of the original warhammer tabletop game...
Originally posted by Apraxis Will the world pvp like Alterac Vally? No, you will not have a death penalty, but you will(if not rezzed from one your team mates in the battle, which also some disadvanteges.. like no active buffs, not full health.. and the healer will just have some time to rezz you, and it is not really cheap to do so) die, you will respawn in the warcamp of your realm outside of the contested area.. and withit you have to run back to your actual battle, which results in a) 10+ minute run without buffs, without allys
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.
But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Ok. Where i got the information. I got it from some beta leakers. What did i got from them?
That you spawn at the warcamp, which are outside of the contested areas(outside the rvr zones)..(and i guess you could find this information even elsewhere) the hassle of running back without allies and buffs is well.. just a educated guess and in comparation to my experience with DAoC. And most of the time you will not run alone back, and instead of that, just wait that your group come to you, and pick you up,, or respawn at the same place.
About the time.. well, it is another educated guess.. which depends of the size of the contestet area(the size differs from tier1(smallest) to tier4(hugest) and this information is offical available), and where your group actually fight. How large are the contested area? Hmm.. i dont know exactly at the moment.. i can slightly remember somthing like "you need around 30 mins to run from one end to the other".. but i cant remember, where i got this information, or even if it is true, or just a speculation. Maybe i should ask someone, who knows it exactly, should i?
Ok so basically
1) we don't know
2) Devs have said that death penalty will be very light.
They haven't said that death penalty would be meaningful. Why? They know this is what it takes to sell by the milions in 2008.
And if we go read the beta leaks, what we are discurring here is the least of the concerns.
Originally posted by Apraxis Will the world pvp like Alterac Vally? No, you will not have a death penalty, but you will(if not rezzed from one your team mates in the battle, which also some disadvanteges.. like no active buffs, not full health.. and the healer will just have some time to rezz you, and it is not really cheap to do so) die, you will respawn in the warcamp of your realm outside of the contested area.. and withit you have to run back to your actual battle, which results in a) 10+ minute run without buffs, without allys
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.
But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Ok. Where i got the information. I got it from some beta leakers. What did i got from them?
That you spawn at the warcamp, which are outside of the contested areas(outside the rvr zones)..(and i guess you could find this information even elsewhere) the hassle of running back without allies and buffs is well.. just a educated guess and in comparation to my experience with DAoC. And most of the time you will not run alone back, and instead of that, just wait that your group come to you, and pick you up,, or respawn at the same place.
About the time.. well, it is another educated guess.. which depends of the size of the contestet area(the size differs from tier1(smallest) to tier4(hugest) and this information is offical available), and where your group actually fight. How large are the contested area? Hmm.. i dont know exactly at the moment.. i can slightly remember somthing like "you need around 30 mins to run from one end to the other".. but i cant remember, where i got this information, or even if it is true, or just a speculation. Maybe i should ask someone, who knows it exactly, should i?
Ok so basically
1) we don't know
2) Devs have said that death penalty will be very light.
They haven't said that death penalty would be meaningful. Why? They know this is what it takes to sell by the milions in 2008.
And if we go read the beta leaks, what we are discurring here is the least of the concerns.
So I guess you won the thread and showed everyone how clever you really are.
Originally posted by altairzq Ok so basically 1) we don't know 2) Devs have said that death penalty will be very light. They haven't said that death penalty would be meaningful. Why? They know this is what it takes to sell by the milions in 2008.
And if we go read the beta leaks, what we are discurring here is the least of the concerns.
We know a lot, basicly almost all informations about WAR are available at the one or the other source.. we know almost all classes with all theirs skills(with all details), we know all maps and the world and what everything is about, we know how it plays and feels now, and can predict, how it will at release. The only thing we dont know is how they balance a few things out up to release.
Quite simple said. Overall WAR is a pvp game, with a very casual approach to it. There are no death penalities(to run a lil bit is not a penalty), there are no high pre requests(like extreme item dependents and required item grinding), it is easy accessable and easy joinable, even for just a few hours. It is from the feeling and the approach a lot like DAoC, but more polished, and more casual friendly, and the posibility to pvp from day one. (in the beginning of DAoC you had to waste around 30-40 hours played to become max. level before you could really pvp.. and well.. it was really a waste of time)
On the other side it is not as deep of a pvp experience as maybe some hardcore pvp games, like EvE or shadowbane, there is no or almost no economy or it is not as relevant, the keeps and city capture are not permanent, they deliver some advantages, but not to have them do not break anything.. to lose in pvp does not hurt anyone, it is just some sort of realm pride, little advantage, and competition of fighting. Guilds are there, but they dont have a lot of power or are dominat at WAR, you can easily play just with a few friends without missing anything(although to have one full group will be a huge advantage in a lot of areas.. but well.. you need just 5 other ppl for it.. no need to join a guild for it).
But nevertheless, it is the only mmorpg with pvp, and the best(but this is not really hard, because there is no real pvp game anywhere.. except EvE maybe). WoW is anything, but not a pvp game.. pvp is there a joke and a afterthough as in the most mmorpgs out there, the same is as much as i know true for AoC.
Is it better than WoW PvP and the alterac vally? Of course, one hundred times better.. wow pvp is a joke, and i wouldnt call it pvp.. but it is not as intriguing and deep(effect on the world) like in EvE(but well.. the combat of EvE isnt as good too.. a lot to slow and just tactical.. so not so much my cup of tea.. with wing commander combat mixed with the tactical deepness i would play it anyday and prefer it everything out there.. including WAR), but with less prerequests, and not so much need to invested a lot of time. You really have to commit yourself to EvE to have some fun and experience those deep pvp.
Look at WAR a little bit like some multiplayer RTS or FPS games, just with a lot more ppl involved, and ongoing(the same enemies and allies all the time), but as those games reduced just to fighting(for the sake of fighting sometimes.. and well.. realm pride and bragging rights) and not with the overall approach like EvE.. where PvP is much more and not just the fight. And WAR is definitifly not a virtual living world.. well maybe we could say, what WoW was for PvE and PvE Raids is WAR for PvP.
Overall, as there is nothing better available, and for the short fun for pvp, it is the best to do as a pvp player in the next time. Of course for hardcore pvp player, which are willingly to commit some more time into a game, it will be just a time filler for some games, which maybe are more hardcore, and more intriguing, and by the same more time involving, like Darkfall, Earthrise or Mortal Online(but they have to release first, and have to prove that they are not bugridden and broken from the very beginning.. like DnL and Shadowbane in some regards).. which are a little bit more like UO, shadowbane or EvE, and try to progress this kind of gameplay and are more of a virtual world(sandbox), and are more hardcore if it comes down to pvp, pvp targets, but those will not be for everyone.. whereas WAR is a game made for everyone, which is at least slightly interested in pvp.
But however.. this thread should have been ended with the little answer. No. But because i know that you meant more than the simple question, i gave you this answer, with the few lines above from me. Take it, and make out of it what you want. But.. if you want a specific answer, you should ask a specific question.. and the answer to your OP question is as it was always.. and now in ticker style:
You asked, will WAR only be a disorganized(no.. you will have highly organized groups unlike in AV) neverending battle(no.. every battle wil have and absolute end), with dying(we play pvp.. dying is your daily fortune), respawning(the same), run to front.. ever ongoing(not really like in AV, because every battle will have an end.. but you will do it for the next fight, the next battle)... and without a clue what is going on(well.. everyone should exactly know what is going on.. and the targets will differ from player to player.. some will just hunt for renown, some will look for a challenge, some will try to bring the realm target a step further, some want just some pvp, some want to be part of something bigger, some want to unlock some pve content, some want to make some money for different reasons ..
Originally posted by Apraxis Will the world pvp like Alterac Vally? No, you will not have a death penalty, but you will(if not rezzed from one your team mates in the battle, which also some disadvanteges.. like no active buffs, not full health.. and the healer will just have some time to rezz you, and it is not really cheap to do so) die, you will respawn in the warcamp of your realm outside of the contested area.. and withit you have to run back to your actual battle, which results in a) 10+ minute run without buffs, without allys
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.
But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Lol, I'm on the totally opposite side there..
10 minutes run back to the fight not enough for you? Are you insane?
Tell me with a straight face that you'll enjoy a game where you'll have to spend 10 minutes pressing the "W" key for each minute you actually spend PvP-ing?
Meh, smaller death penalties, short run times = more PvP. I'm buying this game to bash some skulls in and not to admire the scenery. The same scenery. Repeatedly...
And when i finally get there, where the "fight" is supposed to be, I'll find an epic standoff with people staring at each other from across the field cause no one wants to risk a fight they're not 100% sure they'll win. Why? Because everybody's so afraid they'll be pressing that damn "W" key for 10 minutes while admiring the scenery. Again.
Try to count one minute aloud, that's 60 seconds, while staring at this screen and pressing the "W" key. Now let's see how long would you like to have your average run time...
Originally posted by Apraxis Will the world pvp like Alterac Vally? No, you will not have a death penalty, but you will(if not rezzed from one your team mates in the battle, which also some disadvanteges.. like no active buffs, not full health.. and the healer will just have some time to rezz you, and it is not really cheap to do so) die, you will respawn in the warcamp of your realm outside of the contested area.. and withit you have to run back to your actual battle, which results in a) 10+ minute run without buffs, without allys
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.
But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Lol, I'm on the totally opposite side there..
10 minutes run back to the fight not enough for you? Are you insane?
Tell me with a straight face that you'll enjoy a game where you'll have to spend 10 minutes pressing the "W" key for each minute you actually spend PvP-ing?
Meh, smaller death penalties, short run times = more PvP. I'm buying this game to bash some skulls in and not to admire the scenery. The same scenery. Repeatedly...
And when i finally get there, where the "fight" is supposed to be, I'll find an epic standoff with people staring at each other from across the field cause no one wants to risk a fight they're not 100% sure they'll win. Why? Because everybody's so afraid they'll be pressing that damn "W" key for 10 minutes while admiring the scenery. Again.
Try to count one minute aloud, that's 60 seconds, while staring at this screen and pressing the "W" key. Now let's see how long would you like to have your average run time...
First of all, 10 mins. is not a lot, and i wouldnt call it penalty. And now i try to explain, why it is neccessary. It has a lot to do with the OPs opening post. When you could rejoin a battle as fast, the battle would never end.. you would die, rejoin, die rejoin, with no end in sight.
But every battle must have a definite end. So that you have the winner and the loser, that you can collect your loot, brag about your victory, lick your wounds, reorganize your group, and look for another fight.. on maybe another place with another circumstances, and get a completely other experience out of it, as of the battle before.
When you fight a neverending fight with no clear winnner, it will get boring very fast, and will be reduced to just senseless fighting for the sake of some fight. it will become a complete disorganized crowd, with a lot of ppl bored about it and less concentrated about the fight.. and after some time, noone really knows what is going on, or what they do here.
With other words, and the first case you will have focused player, which want to win the battle.. it will be strategical, and everyone will try to do their best to come out as the winner.
In the second case noone cares about.. a lot of ppl standing around and do nothing, or a few fights without a lot of engagement. And the one will win finally, with the less leaving for boredom.. like it was in the Alterac Valley.
The first thrilling, the second is boring.
And that is the point. And to realize it, the fighter in each army have to dying definite at some time, and have not to come back as fast.. to interupt the outcome of the battle again.
Yeap.. you will have healing and resurrection, but at some point they will die, the one side will gain the upper hand and will actually win the fight. And to settle this, and for a interesting and thrilling fight, you need some time.. and 10-15 minutes is a good time frame for it.
And now a example time frame for a good battle.(group fight as example) You fight around 10 minute without that one dying definite(everyone got healed or resurrected the one or other time). Then the first is actually dying and cant be resurrected, and the other side got a upper hand(there is a possibility to turn the battle, but it will be harder) After 10 more minutes the battle is over.
So you have actually around 10 minutes to find a battle, 20 minutes of overall battle, and a few have to wait up to 10-15 minutes. Overall you have half of the time a exciting fight.. and most probably and in reality it is even less.. yeah,, it is much more of the time boring that exciting.. but life is rugged.
On for the dying player? Well.. come on... smoke a cigarette, go to pee, or what ever you do in a commercial on TV.. until your group come back and pick you up again.
That was one of the main differences because DAoC PvP was fun, and WoW PvP wasnt.
On for the dying player? Well.. come on... smoke a cigarette, go to pee, or what ever you do in a commercial on TV.. until your group come back and pick you up again. That was one of the main differences because DAoC PvP was fun, and WoW PvP wasnt.
On for the dying player? Well.. come on... smoke a cigarette, go to pee, or what ever you do in a commercial on TV.. until your group come back and pick you up again. That was one of the main differences because DAoC PvP was fun, and WoW PvP wasnt.
QFT.
Pheace, I couldn't have said it better myself!
/edit
And as for the whole Apraxis post...
Man... Death penalties and res timers have nothing whatsoever to do with whether a battlefield is meaningful or focused or fun in any way. Longer res timers (including runs) = less PvP. That's simple math, no escaping it there - you spend more time waiting and travelling than fighting, and so do your opponents, you know the guys who are providing you with content in the form of opposition. In addition there is this whole psychological factor where people will tend to avoid situations where risk/reward odds do not favour them - greater the risk, there is less chance anyone will try anything.
Death timers and death counters are the lamest and the least imaginative tools in a PvP game designer's cookbook. There are many other game design tools that can be used to create interesting game conflict situations. Try playing a Quake Wars campaign with a good clan and then tell me that this PVP is not both more complex and intense as a group experience than any found in MMORPGso far. It is precisely the non-existence of individual death penalties that promotes group coordination and loyalty.
Quite opposite to your unsubstantiated statements individual death penalties are a major detractor to communal group play. Just stop and think - a death penalty punishes an INDIVIDUAL for eschewing his own safety to further group goals. In my experience with PvP games (and I've played A LOT - FPSs, MMORPGs teamplay boardgames..) the amount group cohesion is invariably inversely proportional to the harshness of individual death penalties. Death penalties lead to selfishness and cowardice - precisely the qualities I don't want to see in my allies.
On for the dying player? Well.. come on... smoke a cigarette, go to pee, or what ever you do in a commercial on TV.. until your group come back and pick you up again. That was one of the main differences because DAoC PvP was fun, and WoW PvP wasnt.
QFT.
Pheace, I couldn't have said it better myself!
/edit
And as for the whole Apraxis post...
Man, you're so ignorant. Death penalties and res timers have nothing whatsoever to do with whether a battlefield is meaningful or focused or fun in any way. Longer res timers (including runs) = less PvP. That's simple math, no escaping it there - you spend more time waiting and travelling than fighting, and so do your opponents, you know the guys who are providing you with content in the form of opposition. In addition there is this whole psychological factor where people will tend to avoid situations where risk/reward odds do not favour them - greater the risk, there is less chance anyone will try anything.
Yeap, there is less pvping. But every battle have to end at one point. If you cant end a fight, then there is no reason to even fight. That is the point. But yes.. of course then we could introduce unlimited hp, so noone dies ever. No penalty at all.. but no fun, too. The risk involved and the reward you get out of it have to be balanced.. without any risk(even as less as running a little bit, and for the chance to end a fight) you will not get a lot of reward.
Death timers and death counters are the lamest and the least imaginative tools in a PvP game designer's cookbook. There are many other game design tools that can be used to create interesting game conflict situations. Try playing a Quake Wars campaign with a good clan and then tell me that this PVP is not both more complex and intense as a group experience than any found in MMORPGso far. It is precisely the non-existence of individual death penalties that promotes group coordination and loyalty.
I have played Quake Wars campaigns.. and even there you have to run back to the combat. But what is more important in Quake Wars every campaign will definitivly end. They have solved this with strategical points that have to be taken, and timers which limit the phase of the campaign. And no, Quake Wars is not the pinnacle of pvp. The same with Battlefield, where a counter ticks down until the game is over. But.. both are just multiplayer game with limited players, and a limited time to play it, both isnt true for a mmorpg.
And i will not talk about the time needed(and wasted) to find a even and exciting match in such an enviroments..
In a mmorpg you can maybe compare it more to a team rts match.. one will be eliminated first(and this one have to wait again).. before the one team can defeat completely the other team. Within a battle, where the outcome of a battle is the victory of one team, and the death of the other team you have to deal with such down times.. and if you make a battle with objectives you need other indicators, which define the winning side, and the final end of a battle.
Quite opposite to your unsubstantiated statements individual death penalties are a major detractor to communal group play.
It is not about the individual.. in a group fight, the group is the essential part, but someone have to die first, before the whole group dies.
Just stop and think - a death penalty punishes an INDIVIDUAL for eschewing his own safety to further group goals. In my experience with PvP games (and I've played A LOT - FPSs, MMORPGs teamplay boardgames..) the amount group cohesion is invariably inversely proportional to the harshness of individual death penalties. Death penalties lead to selfishness and cowardice - precisely the qualities I don't want to see in my allies.
On a other side not.. there are no individual penalities, if someone of a groups dies and can not return, the whole group will dying at some point. With other words the balance tips over from one side to the other.
And another point is.. because of that you have resurrection spells, that you can some risky moves(with some costs there), but in the end it have to come down that one time will die and will be defeated.
But i guess you will never be convinced from my arguements.. so ok, lets bring in unlimited Hit points, and fight forever without any end. No dying, no penalty.. thats fine.
And now you will say most probably that the Alterac Valley pvp was much more fun than the roaming group(like 8vs8 or 16vs16) pvp in DAoC, right?
On for the dying player? Well.. come on... smoke a cigarette, go to pee, or what ever you do in a commercial on TV.. until your group come back and pick you up again. That was one of the main differences because DAoC PvP was fun, and WoW PvP wasnt.
QFT.
Pheace, I couldn't have said it better myself!
/edit
And as for the whole Apraxis post...
Man, you're so ignorant. Death penalties and res timers have nothing whatsoever to do with whether a battlefield is meaningful or focused or fun in any way. Longer res timers (including runs) = less PvP. That's simple math, no escaping it there - you spend more time waiting and travelling than fighting, and so do your opponents, you know the guys who are providing you with content in the form of opposition. In addition there is this whole psychological factor where people will tend to avoid situations where risk/reward odds do not favour them - greater the risk, there is less chance anyone will try anything.
Yeap, there is less pvping. But every battle have to end at one point. If you cant end a fight, then there is no reason to even fight. That is the point. But yes.. of course then we could introduce unlimited hp, so noone dies ever. No penalty at all.. but no fun, too. The risk involved and the reward you get out of it have to be balanced.. without any risk(even as less as running a little bit, and for the chance to end a fight) you will not get a lot of reward.
You seem to fail to distinguish between group goals and individual goals. This is a group PvP game that happens outside of a barren box. Ofc there will be factors determining who "won" the battle - scenarios all have winning conditions and open world PvP will revolve around taking and holding objectives and keeps. As for running a little bit... 10 minutes is 600 SECONDS. Try counting to 600. Imo, a 30 sec global res timer with an additonal max 30 sec run time has proven itself as the best balanced mechanic to get players back into the fray as soon as possible without loosing the tactical repercussions for dying too often.
Death timers and death counters are the lamest and the least imaginative tools in a PvP game designer's cookbook. There are many other game design tools that can be used to create interesting game conflict situations. Try playing a Quake Wars campaign with a good clan and then tell me that this PVP is not both more complex and intense as a group experience than any found in MMORPGso far. It is precisely the non-existence of individual death penalties that promotes group coordination and loyalty.
I have played Quake Wars campaigns.. and even there you have to run back to the combat. But what is more important in Quake Wars every campaign will definitivly end. They have solved this with strategical points that have to be taken, and timers which limit the phase of the campaign. And no, Quake Wars is not the pinnacle of pvp. The same with Battlefield, where a counter ticks down until the game is over. But.. both are just multiplayer game with limited players, and a limited time to play it, both isnt true for a mmorpg.
And i will not talk about the time needed(and wasted) to find a even and exciting match in such an enviroments..
As I mentioned before, open PvP in WAR is not going to be a deathmach-kill-everybody cagefight experience. There is a bunch of definite goals strewn across the PvP zones and the accomplishment of these group goals should be the main focus of gameplay rather than brawling to see who can kill more than get killed.
Quite opposite to your unsubstantiated statements individual death penalties are a major detractor to communal group play.
It is not about the individual.. in a group fight, the group is the essential part, but someone have to die first, before the whole group dies.
Yes, but should we punish the INDIVIDUAL for doing something brave for the group? I.e. in a standoff situation the guy who attacks first in order to rally his side will invariably get killed, no matter how it turns out in the end. Should he be punished for his bravery? In many PvP games I've found myself in a situation where I'd be charging a group of enemy players all alone and knowing that I'll get killed - just so I can confuse them and delay long enough for my group to organize. The point of group PvP is the feeling of sharing a mutual fate - individual death penalties seriously detract from that.
Just stop and think - a death penalty punishes an INDIVIDUAL for eschewing his own safety to further group goals. In my experience with PvP games (and I've played A LOT - FPSs, MMORPGs teamplay boardgames..) the amount group cohesion is invariably inversely proportional to the harshness of individual death penalties. Death penalties lead to selfishness and cowardice - precisely the qualities I don't want to see in my allies.
On a other side not.. there are no individual penalities, if someone of a groups dies and can not return, the whole group will dying at some point. With other words the balance tips over from one side to the other.
But i guess you will never be convinced from my arguements.. so ok, lets bring in unlimited Hit points, and fight forever without any end. No dying, no penalty.. thats fine.
And now you will say most probably that the Alterac Valley pvp was much more fun than the roaming group(like 8vs8 or 16vs16) pvp in DAoC, right?
You're making the argument ridiculous. No individual death penalties doesn't mean that there are no individual and group goals and victory conditions. DAoC PvP was fun for other reasons and IN SPITE of long run times.
This whole argument reminds me of Diablo 2 devs who, for some unfathomable reason, concluded that the CRUCIAL component in Diablo's success was that there is no respeccing.... After breaking up with Blizard they made Hellgate: London and stubbornly stuck to the "no respec" policy saying that they know what's best. Ofc they were wrong - just like almost everybody said. No respecs was the ONLY real flaw in Diablo 2 design - and for some harebrained reason they concluded quite the opposite.
/edit
Sorry for the "ignorant" bit. I got somewhat carried away. Sorry
if the recently rezzed people can back to the fight fast then the opposing army will have to use tactics to prevent them from rejoining the main army. Maybe have a roaming 8 man group looking for solo and disorganized players running back to fights. Also maybe the terrain can play a big factor like choke points. Choke point A is only wide enough for lets say 4 tanks to line up sideby side and prevent players from getting through. So returning players will have to form new groups or wait for other rezzed players to make a push through. Anytime you plan an offensive Im sure the leaders will think of ways to harass players trying to get to the keep they are sieging and for rezzers returning to the fights.
Comments
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Ok. Where i got the information. I got it from some beta leakers. What did i got from them?
That you spawn at the warcamp, which are outside of the contested areas(outside the rvr zones)..(and i guess you could find this information even elsewhere) the hassle of running back without allies and buffs is well.. just a educated guess and in comparation to my experience with DAoC. And most of the time you will not run alone back, and instead of that, just wait that your group come to you, and pick you up,, or respawn at the same place.
About the time.. well, it is another educated guess.. which depends of the size of the contestet area(the size differs from tier1(smallest) to tier4(hugest) and this information is offical available), and where your group actually fight. How large are the contested area? Hmm.. i dont know exactly at the moment.. i can slightly remember somthing like "you need around 30 mins to run from one end to the other".. but i cant remember, where i got this information, or even if it is true, or just a speculation. Maybe i should ask someone, who knows it exactly, should i?
Hehe, 15 pages?! Nice, didn't read a line, yet. Wanted to hop in cuz by the time i fininsh reading it, might as well get locked...
everything comes full circle, since the original warcraft could be said to be a ripoff from the ideas and visual imagery of the original warhammer tabletop game...
But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Ok. Where i got the information. I got it from some beta leakers. What did i got from them?
That you spawn at the warcamp, which are outside of the contested areas(outside the rvr zones)..(and i guess you could find this information even elsewhere) the hassle of running back without allies and buffs is well.. just a educated guess and in comparation to my experience with DAoC. And most of the time you will not run alone back, and instead of that, just wait that your group come to you, and pick you up,, or respawn at the same place.
About the time.. well, it is another educated guess.. which depends of the size of the contestet area(the size differs from tier1(smallest) to tier4(hugest) and this information is offical available), and where your group actually fight. How large are the contested area? Hmm.. i dont know exactly at the moment.. i can slightly remember somthing like "you need around 30 mins to run from one end to the other".. but i cant remember, where i got this information, or even if it is true, or just a speculation. Maybe i should ask someone, who knows it exactly, should i?
Ok so basically
1) we don't know
2) Devs have said that death penalty will be very light.
They haven't said that death penalty would be meaningful. Why? They know this is what it takes to sell by the milions in 2008.
And if we go read the beta leaks, what we are discurring here is the least of the concerns.
But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Ok. Where i got the information. I got it from some beta leakers. What did i got from them?
That you spawn at the warcamp, which are outside of the contested areas(outside the rvr zones)..(and i guess you could find this information even elsewhere) the hassle of running back without allies and buffs is well.. just a educated guess and in comparation to my experience with DAoC. And most of the time you will not run alone back, and instead of that, just wait that your group come to you, and pick you up,, or respawn at the same place.
About the time.. well, it is another educated guess.. which depends of the size of the contestet area(the size differs from tier1(smallest) to tier4(hugest) and this information is offical available), and where your group actually fight. How large are the contested area? Hmm.. i dont know exactly at the moment.. i can slightly remember somthing like "you need around 30 mins to run from one end to the other".. but i cant remember, where i got this information, or even if it is true, or just a speculation. Maybe i should ask someone, who knows it exactly, should i?
Ok so basically
1) we don't know
2) Devs have said that death penalty will be very light.
They haven't said that death penalty would be meaningful. Why? They know this is what it takes to sell by the milions in 2008.
And if we go read the beta leaks, what we are discurring here is the least of the concerns.
So I guess you won the thread and showed everyone how clever you really are.
We know a lot, basicly almost all informations about WAR are available at the one or the other source.. we know almost all classes with all theirs skills(with all details), we know all maps and the world and what everything is about, we know how it plays and feels now, and can predict, how it will at release. The only thing we dont know is how they balance a few things out up to release.
Quite simple said. Overall WAR is a pvp game, with a very casual approach to it. There are no death penalities(to run a lil bit is not a penalty), there are no high pre requests(like extreme item dependents and required item grinding), it is easy accessable and easy joinable, even for just a few hours. It is from the feeling and the approach a lot like DAoC, but more polished, and more casual friendly, and the posibility to pvp from day one. (in the beginning of DAoC you had to waste around 30-40 hours played to become max. level before you could really pvp.. and well.. it was really a waste of time)
On the other side it is not as deep of a pvp experience as maybe some hardcore pvp games, like EvE or shadowbane, there is no or almost no economy or it is not as relevant, the keeps and city capture are not permanent, they deliver some advantages, but not to have them do not break anything.. to lose in pvp does not hurt anyone, it is just some sort of realm pride, little advantage, and competition of fighting. Guilds are there, but they dont have a lot of power or are dominat at WAR, you can easily play just with a few friends without missing anything(although to have one full group will be a huge advantage in a lot of areas.. but well.. you need just 5 other ppl for it.. no need to join a guild for it).
But nevertheless, it is the only mmorpg with pvp, and the best(but this is not really hard, because there is no real pvp game anywhere.. except EvE maybe). WoW is anything, but not a pvp game.. pvp is there a joke and a afterthough as in the most mmorpgs out there, the same is as much as i know true for AoC.
Is it better than WoW PvP and the alterac vally? Of course, one hundred times better.. wow pvp is a joke, and i wouldnt call it pvp.. but it is not as intriguing and deep(effect on the world) like in EvE(but well.. the combat of EvE isnt as good too.. a lot to slow and just tactical.. so not so much my cup of tea.. with wing commander combat mixed with the tactical deepness i would play it anyday and prefer it everything out there.. including WAR), but with less prerequests, and not so much need to invested a lot of time. You really have to commit yourself to EvE to have some fun and experience those deep pvp.
Look at WAR a little bit like some multiplayer RTS or FPS games, just with a lot more ppl involved, and ongoing(the same enemies and allies all the time), but as those games reduced just to fighting(for the sake of fighting sometimes.. and well.. realm pride and bragging rights) and not with the overall approach like EvE.. where PvP is much more and not just the fight. And WAR is definitifly not a virtual living world.. well maybe we could say, what WoW was for PvE and PvE Raids is WAR for PvP.
Overall, as there is nothing better available, and for the short fun for pvp, it is the best to do as a pvp player in the next time. Of course for hardcore pvp player, which are willingly to commit some more time into a game, it will be just a time filler for some games, which maybe are more hardcore, and more intriguing, and by the same more time involving, like Darkfall, Earthrise or Mortal Online(but they have to release first, and have to prove that they are not bugridden and broken from the very beginning.. like DnL and Shadowbane in some regards).. which are a little bit more like UO, shadowbane or EvE, and try to progress this kind of gameplay and are more of a virtual world(sandbox), and are more hardcore if it comes down to pvp, pvp targets, but those will not be for everyone.. whereas WAR is a game made for everyone, which is at least slightly interested in pvp.
But however.. this thread should have been ended with the little answer. No. But because i know that you meant more than the simple question, i gave you this answer, with the few lines above from me. Take it, and make out of it what you want. But.. if you want a specific answer, you should ask a specific question.. and the answer to your OP question is as it was always.. and now in ticker style:
You asked, will WAR only be a disorganized(no.. you will have highly organized groups unlike in AV) neverending battle(no.. every battle wil have and absolute end), with dying(we play pvp.. dying is your daily fortune), respawning(the same), run to front.. ever ongoing(not really like in AV, because every battle will have an end.. but you will do it for the next fight, the next battle)... and without a clue what is going on(well.. everyone should exactly know what is going on.. and the targets will differ from player to player.. some will just hunt for renown, some will look for a challenge, some will try to bring the realm target a step further, some want just some pvp, some want to be part of something bigger, some want to unlock some pve content, some want to make some money for different reasons ..
Hehe, this is fun
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Lol, I'm on the totally opposite side there..
10 minutes run back to the fight not enough for you? Are you insane?
Tell me with a straight face that you'll enjoy a game where you'll have to spend 10 minutes pressing the "W" key for each minute you actually spend PvP-ing?
Meh, smaller death penalties, short run times = more PvP. I'm buying this game to bash some skulls in and not to admire the scenery. The same scenery. Repeatedly...
And when i finally get there, where the "fight" is supposed to be, I'll find an epic standoff with people staring at each other from across the field cause no one wants to risk a fight they're not 100% sure they'll win. Why? Because everybody's so afraid they'll be pressing that damn "W" key for 10 minutes while admiring the scenery. Again.
Try to count one minute aloud, that's 60 seconds, while staring at this screen and pressing the "W" key. Now let's see how long would you like to have your average run time...
First of all thank you for such an elaborate reply.But let me stop here, becasue this is very important, and it will shape how the rest of the system will feel. Where did you get such information? Because I haven't been able to find any official information regarding how long will the travel back be, and in what conditions will it be. Aren't you just translating DAoC penalty to WAR, just imagining it will be the same? Because reading what people have writen in this thread, we don't know yet. It might be 30 minutes (that would be something), it might be 10 minutes (not bad, depending on other factors could work), it might be 1-5 minutes (that's what I am afraid they will do).
Lol, I'm on the totally opposite side there..
10 minutes run back to the fight not enough for you? Are you insane?
Tell me with a straight face that you'll enjoy a game where you'll have to spend 10 minutes pressing the "W" key for each minute you actually spend PvP-ing?
Meh, smaller death penalties, short run times = more PvP. I'm buying this game to bash some skulls in and not to admire the scenery. The same scenery. Repeatedly...
And when i finally get there, where the "fight" is supposed to be, I'll find an epic standoff with people staring at each other from across the field cause no one wants to risk a fight they're not 100% sure they'll win. Why? Because everybody's so afraid they'll be pressing that damn "W" key for 10 minutes while admiring the scenery. Again.
Try to count one minute aloud, that's 60 seconds, while staring at this screen and pressing the "W" key. Now let's see how long would you like to have your average run time...
First of all, 10 mins. is not a lot, and i wouldnt call it penalty. And now i try to explain, why it is neccessary. It has a lot to do with the OPs opening post. When you could rejoin a battle as fast, the battle would never end.. you would die, rejoin, die rejoin, with no end in sight.
But every battle must have a definite end. So that you have the winner and the loser, that you can collect your loot, brag about your victory, lick your wounds, reorganize your group, and look for another fight.. on maybe another place with another circumstances, and get a completely other experience out of it, as of the battle before.
When you fight a neverending fight with no clear winnner, it will get boring very fast, and will be reduced to just senseless fighting for the sake of some fight. it will become a complete disorganized crowd, with a lot of ppl bored about it and less concentrated about the fight.. and after some time, noone really knows what is going on, or what they do here.
With other words, and the first case you will have focused player, which want to win the battle.. it will be strategical, and everyone will try to do their best to come out as the winner.
In the second case noone cares about.. a lot of ppl standing around and do nothing, or a few fights without a lot of engagement. And the one will win finally, with the less leaving for boredom.. like it was in the Alterac Valley.
The first thrilling, the second is boring.
And that is the point. And to realize it, the fighter in each army have to dying definite at some time, and have not to come back as fast.. to interupt the outcome of the battle again.
Yeap.. you will have healing and resurrection, but at some point they will die, the one side will gain the upper hand and will actually win the fight. And to settle this, and for a interesting and thrilling fight, you need some time.. and 10-15 minutes is a good time frame for it.
And now a example time frame for a good battle.(group fight as example) You fight around 10 minute without that one dying definite(everyone got healed or resurrected the one or other time). Then the first is actually dying and cant be resurrected, and the other side got a upper hand(there is a possibility to turn the battle, but it will be harder) After 10 more minutes the battle is over.
So you have actually around 10 minutes to find a battle, 20 minutes of overall battle, and a few have to wait up to 10-15 minutes. Overall you have half of the time a exciting fight.. and most probably and in reality it is even less.. yeah,, it is much more of the time boring that exciting.. but life is rugged.
On for the dying player? Well.. come on... smoke a cigarette, go to pee, or what ever you do in a commercial on TV.. until your group come back and pick you up again.
That was one of the main differences because DAoC PvP was fun, and WoW PvP wasnt.
QFT.
Pheace, I couldn't have said it better myself!
/edit
And as for the whole Apraxis post...
Man... Death penalties and res timers have nothing whatsoever to do with whether a battlefield is meaningful or focused or fun in any way. Longer res timers (including runs) = less PvP. That's simple math, no escaping it there - you spend more time waiting and travelling than fighting, and so do your opponents, you know the guys who are providing you with content in the form of opposition. In addition there is this whole psychological factor where people will tend to avoid situations where risk/reward odds do not favour them - greater the risk, there is less chance anyone will try anything.
Death timers and death counters are the lamest and the least imaginative tools in a PvP game designer's cookbook. There are many other game design tools that can be used to create interesting game conflict situations. Try playing a Quake Wars campaign with a good clan and then tell me that this PVP is not both more complex and intense as a group experience than any found in MMORPGso far. It is precisely the non-existence of individual death penalties that promotes group coordination and loyalty.
Quite opposite to your unsubstantiated statements individual death penalties are a major detractor to communal group play. Just stop and think - a death penalty punishes an INDIVIDUAL for eschewing his own safety to further group goals. In my experience with PvP games (and I've played A LOT - FPSs, MMORPGs teamplay boardgames..) the amount group cohesion is invariably inversely proportional to the harshness of individual death penalties. Death penalties lead to selfishness and cowardice - precisely the qualities I don't want to see in my allies.
QFT.
Pheace, I couldn't have said it better myself!
/edit
And as for the whole Apraxis post...
Man, you're so ignorant. Death penalties and res timers have nothing whatsoever to do with whether a battlefield is meaningful or focused or fun in any way. Longer res timers (including runs) = less PvP. That's simple math, no escaping it there - you spend more time waiting and travelling than fighting, and so do your opponents, you know the guys who are providing you with content in the form of opposition. In addition there is this whole psychological factor where people will tend to avoid situations where risk/reward odds do not favour them - greater the risk, there is less chance anyone will try anything.
Yeap, there is less pvping. But every battle have to end at one point. If you cant end a fight, then there is no reason to even fight. That is the point. But yes.. of course then we could introduce unlimited hp, so noone dies ever. No penalty at all.. but no fun, too. The risk involved and the reward you get out of it have to be balanced.. without any risk(even as less as running a little bit, and for the chance to end a fight) you will not get a lot of reward.
Death timers and death counters are the lamest and the least imaginative tools in a PvP game designer's cookbook. There are many other game design tools that can be used to create interesting game conflict situations. Try playing a Quake Wars campaign with a good clan and then tell me that this PVP is not both more complex and intense as a group experience than any found in MMORPGso far. It is precisely the non-existence of individual death penalties that promotes group coordination and loyalty.
I have played Quake Wars campaigns.. and even there you have to run back to the combat. But what is more important in Quake Wars every campaign will definitivly end. They have solved this with strategical points that have to be taken, and timers which limit the phase of the campaign. And no, Quake Wars is not the pinnacle of pvp. The same with Battlefield, where a counter ticks down until the game is over. But.. both are just multiplayer game with limited players, and a limited time to play it, both isnt true for a mmorpg.
And i will not talk about the time needed(and wasted) to find a even and exciting match in such an enviroments..
In a mmorpg you can maybe compare it more to a team rts match.. one will be eliminated first(and this one have to wait again).. before the one team can defeat completely the other team. Within a battle, where the outcome of a battle is the victory of one team, and the death of the other team you have to deal with such down times.. and if you make a battle with objectives you need other indicators, which define the winning side, and the final end of a battle.
Quite opposite to your unsubstantiated statements individual death penalties are a major detractor to communal group play.
It is not about the individual.. in a group fight, the group is the essential part, but someone have to die first, before the whole group dies.
Just stop and think - a death penalty punishes an INDIVIDUAL for eschewing his own safety to further group goals. In my experience with PvP games (and I've played A LOT - FPSs, MMORPGs teamplay boardgames..) the amount group cohesion is invariably inversely proportional to the harshness of individual death penalties. Death penalties lead to selfishness and cowardice - precisely the qualities I don't want to see in my allies.
On a other side not.. there are no individual penalities, if someone of a groups dies and can not return, the whole group will dying at some point. With other words the balance tips over from one side to the other.
And another point is.. because of that you have resurrection spells, that you can some risky moves(with some costs there), but in the end it have to come down that one time will die and will be defeated.
But i guess you will never be convinced from my arguements.. so ok, lets bring in unlimited Hit points, and fight forever without any end. No dying, no penalty.. thats fine.
And now you will say most probably that the Alterac Valley pvp was much more fun than the roaming group(like 8vs8 or 16vs16) pvp in DAoC, right?
QFT.
Pheace, I couldn't have said it better myself!
/edit
And as for the whole Apraxis post...
Man, you're so ignorant. Death penalties and res timers have nothing whatsoever to do with whether a battlefield is meaningful or focused or fun in any way. Longer res timers (including runs) = less PvP. That's simple math, no escaping it there - you spend more time waiting and travelling than fighting, and so do your opponents, you know the guys who are providing you with content in the form of opposition. In addition there is this whole psychological factor where people will tend to avoid situations where risk/reward odds do not favour them - greater the risk, there is less chance anyone will try anything.
Yeap, there is less pvping. But every battle have to end at one point. If you cant end a fight, then there is no reason to even fight. That is the point. But yes.. of course then we could introduce unlimited hp, so noone dies ever. No penalty at all.. but no fun, too. The risk involved and the reward you get out of it have to be balanced.. without any risk(even as less as running a little bit, and for the chance to end a fight) you will not get a lot of reward.
You seem to fail to distinguish between group goals and individual goals. This is a group PvP game that happens outside of a barren box. Ofc there will be factors determining who "won" the battle - scenarios all have winning conditions and open world PvP will revolve around taking and holding objectives and keeps. As for running a little bit... 10 minutes is 600 SECONDS. Try counting to 600. Imo, a 30 sec global res timer with an additonal max 30 sec run time has proven itself as the best balanced mechanic to get players back into the fray as soon as possible without loosing the tactical repercussions for dying too often.
Death timers and death counters are the lamest and the least imaginative tools in a PvP game designer's cookbook. There are many other game design tools that can be used to create interesting game conflict situations. Try playing a Quake Wars campaign with a good clan and then tell me that this PVP is not both more complex and intense as a group experience than any found in MMORPGso far. It is precisely the non-existence of individual death penalties that promotes group coordination and loyalty.
I have played Quake Wars campaigns.. and even there you have to run back to the combat. But what is more important in Quake Wars every campaign will definitivly end. They have solved this with strategical points that have to be taken, and timers which limit the phase of the campaign. And no, Quake Wars is not the pinnacle of pvp. The same with Battlefield, where a counter ticks down until the game is over. But.. both are just multiplayer game with limited players, and a limited time to play it, both isnt true for a mmorpg.
And i will not talk about the time needed(and wasted) to find a even and exciting match in such an enviroments..
As I mentioned before, open PvP in WAR is not going to be a deathmach-kill-everybody cagefight experience. There is a bunch of definite goals strewn across the PvP zones and the accomplishment of these group goals should be the main focus of gameplay rather than brawling to see who can kill more than get killed.
Quite opposite to your unsubstantiated statements individual death penalties are a major detractor to communal group play.
It is not about the individual.. in a group fight, the group is the essential part, but someone have to die first, before the whole group dies.
Yes, but should we punish the INDIVIDUAL for doing something brave for the group? I.e. in a standoff situation the guy who attacks first in order to rally his side will invariably get killed, no matter how it turns out in the end. Should he be punished for his bravery? In many PvP games I've found myself in a situation where I'd be charging a group of enemy players all alone and knowing that I'll get killed - just so I can confuse them and delay long enough for my group to organize. The point of group PvP is the feeling of sharing a mutual fate - individual death penalties seriously detract from that.
Just stop and think - a death penalty punishes an INDIVIDUAL for eschewing his own safety to further group goals. In my experience with PvP games (and I've played A LOT - FPSs, MMORPGs teamplay boardgames..) the amount group cohesion is invariably inversely proportional to the harshness of individual death penalties. Death penalties lead to selfishness and cowardice - precisely the qualities I don't want to see in my allies.
On a other side not.. there are no individual penalities, if someone of a groups dies and can not return, the whole group will dying at some point. With other words the balance tips over from one side to the other.
But i guess you will never be convinced from my arguements.. so ok, lets bring in unlimited Hit points, and fight forever without any end. No dying, no penalty.. thats fine.
And now you will say most probably that the Alterac Valley pvp was much more fun than the roaming group(like 8vs8 or 16vs16) pvp in DAoC, right?
You're making the argument ridiculous. No individual death penalties doesn't mean that there are no individual and group goals and victory conditions. DAoC PvP was fun for other reasons and IN SPITE of long run times.
This whole argument reminds me of Diablo 2 devs who, for some unfathomable reason, concluded that the CRUCIAL component in Diablo's success was that there is no respeccing.... After breaking up with Blizard they made Hellgate: London and stubbornly stuck to the "no respec" policy saying that they know what's best. Ofc they were wrong - just like almost everybody said. No respecs was the ONLY real flaw in Diablo 2 design - and for some harebrained reason they concluded quite the opposite.
/edit
Sorry for the "ignorant" bit. I got somewhat carried away. Sorry
if the recently rezzed people can back to the fight fast then the opposing army will have to use tactics to prevent them from rejoining the main army. Maybe have a roaming 8 man group looking for solo and disorganized players running back to fights. Also maybe the terrain can play a big factor like choke points. Choke point A is only wide enough for lets say 4 tanks to line up sideby side and prevent players from getting through. So returning players will have to form new groups or wait for other rezzed players to make a push through. Anytime you plan an offensive Im sure the leaders will think of ways to harass players trying to get to the keep they are sieging and for rezzers returning to the fights.