Meh, just a mishmash of a few systems already out there. I personally feel it is regurgitated systems from over 10 years ago. I personally think it will not work how they want... they will never have 100 players vs 100 players, sorry to break any hearts but not realistic thinking.
Of course you'll never have a 100 person versus 100 person battle but that isn't the point.
What matters is that there's up to 2000 people in the entire battle.
I don't play battlefield to have 32v32 fights, most are 1v1 or maybe 2v2. I play it to be part of a fight far bigger than myself. That's what WvW will be like. Also, a lot of anything is regurgitated systems, but note that no single game has ever done them all in one well done situation. Taking existing systems, polishing them and combining them with a purpose is how games evolve.
There is very little in the way of 'brand new' systems in any game.
Still. 500 players per side isn't really a reflection of a whole server. There's either going to be a limited number of people allowed per sever or multiple instances of the Mists
Im going to assume you didnt read the article. Two weeks of continuos play. Realms are matched based on prior ranks. So yes, there will be multiple fights going on between like ranked worlds. Then after two weeks, they tally the scores, adjust your world's new rank, and then put you against other worlds more equal to yours, then start all over again.
Meh, just a mishmash of a few systems already out there. I personally feel it is regurgitated systems from over 10 years ago. I personally think it will not work how they want... they will never have 100 players vs 100 players, sorry to break any hearts but not realistic thinking.
I am pretty sure the maps are designed to have a changing population between off and peak hours. Plus darkfall has had a lot of over 100 vs 100 battles and they only sold about 100k copies. Given the fact you do not need a current subscription will also keep this full more often.
Ok yeah, that sounds incredible and brings back so many great memories from back-in-the-day playing Dark Age of Camelot.
And now that I think about it, thats the last MMO I enjoyed PvP in {or rather RvR} ~ same thing really. Ever since then I just never really enjoyed PvP because of the rather lackluster-small-scale battlefields and the few MMOs that tried open world PvP actually ended up being minimal and nobody ever did it much{WAR for example}. Another thing that drives me to ignore current PvP events is that it was so frustrating by constantly getting steamrolled from twinked players, or just in general because of AFKing bots and lazy players!
With this info on WvW, I think deep down inside me, a little kindling of PvP has reignited...holy crap I want to play this so bad now!
so if the supply caravans can be escorted, can they be attacked? if supply lines can be cut, i will be so happy.
EDIT: "Hopefully you have someone who can help protect the caravans delivering supply to your keep, or you may not be able to hold off determined attackers for long!" YES!!!!!
This is exactly the kind of attention to detail that will evelate this game.
Honestly, the ambition and imagination ANet is putting into this title is inspiring.
so if the supply caravans can be escorted, can they be attacked? if supply lines can be cut, i will be so happy.
EDIT: "Hopefully you have someone who can help protect the caravans delivering supply to your keep, or you may not be able to hold off determined attackers for long!" YES!!!!!
This is exactly the kind of attention to detail that will evelate this game.
Honestly, the ambition and imagination ANet is putting into this title is inspiring.
Yup,i would say it's game, set and match.
for me yeah. i see some people are still meh, but whatever. all i know is that i'm going to be dreaming (during my classes) of wreaking havoc on supply lines while a massive seige grinds along in the distance. there are so many tactical and strategic possibilities that could come out of what they outlined in that blog it boggles the mind.
Im going to assume you didnt read the article. Two weeks of continuos play. Realms are matched based on prior ranks. So yes, there will be multiple fights going on between like ranked worlds. Then after two weeks, they tally the scores, adjust your world's new rank, and then put you against other worlds more equal to yours, then start all over again.
I did read the article. I meant multiple instances of the Mists due to it reaching it's cap of maximum number of players.
This all sounds too good to be true , the only sad thing is we still don't know how big 'big' really is. (the maps)
The reason why they released this news now, is to prepare us because we'll get to see it in all it's glory, from all the gameplay footage the press will get. Then you can judge whether the maps are large enough and other things.
Im going to assume you didnt read the article. Two weeks of continuos play. Realms are matched based on prior ranks. So yes, there will be multiple fights going on between like ranked worlds. Then after two weeks, they tally the scores, adjust your world's new rank, and then put you against other worlds more equal to yours, then start all over again.
I did read the article. I meant multiple instances of the Mists due to it reaching it's cap of maximum number of players.
everything anet has released has been very conservative. they've kept things quiet, only talking about the stuff that they will do. so when i see "over 100" that just means to me that they've so far managed over 100 players on one map, and that they intend to raise the number. while this is only (hopeful) speculation, i would say that they're aiming for at least 500 players per map if not more. but i agree the possibility of instances does put me on edge (what's the point of fighting for that tower if, the next time you play, you are in a different instance and it's gone? and how would they even score three servers playing against each other in three different instances?). however, from what we've seen them do so far, i trust them to come up with a great solution if there is a problem with the cap.
Im going to assume you didnt read the article. Two weeks of continuos play. Realms are matched based on prior ranks. So yes, there will be multiple fights going on between like ranked worlds. Then after two weeks, they tally the scores, adjust your world's new rank, and then put you against other worlds more equal to yours, then start all over again.
I did read the article. I meant multiple instances of the Mists due to it reaching it's cap of maximum number of players.
I doubt they would do that and the cap is 2,000 players for now (500 per map) and the fact that you can attack other home server's Borderlands and how there is a reason in doing so, I think players will be spread out and the cap won't be reached so easily.
Im going to assume you didnt read the article. Two weeks of continuos play. Realms are matched based on prior ranks. So yes, there will be multiple fights going on between like ranked worlds. Then after two weeks, they tally the scores, adjust your world's new rank, and then put you against other worlds more equal to yours, then start all over again.
I did read the article. I meant multiple instances of the Mists due to it reaching it's cap of maximum number of players.
Ah, so you are worried that there wont be enough slots for all to get into a world fight. I can see that as an issue, but if keeping them full at 100,200, or 300 players on a server means que waiting times. Then I dont see that as an issue tbh. If a server has 2000-3000 players, its doubtful there will be a mass of people trying to get in. Maybe a peak times.
I doubt they would do that and the cap is 2,000 players for now (500 per map) and the fact that you can attack other home server's Borderlands and how there is a reason in doing so, I think players will be spread out and the cap won't be reached so easily.
but is a cap of 2,000 enough to meet demand from three servers is the question. (especially after this reveal). i am hopeful though.
Im going to assume you didnt read the article. Two weeks of continuos play. Realms are matched based on prior ranks. So yes, there will be multiple fights going on between like ranked worlds. Then after two weeks, they tally the scores, adjust your world's new rank, and then put you against other worlds more equal to yours, then start all over again.
I did read the article. I meant multiple instances of the Mists due to it reaching it's cap of maximum number of players.
Ah, so you are worried that there wont be enough slots for all to get into a world fight. I can see that as an issue, but if keeping them full at 100,200, or 300 players on a server means que waiting times. Then I dont see that as an issue tbh. If a server has 2000-3000 players, its doubtful there will be a mass of people trying to get in. Maybe a peak times.
really, really good point. we don't know what the pop on a server will be yet, either.
and how would they even score three servers playing against each other in three different instances?
That was clearly explained:
"Each objective on a map is worth points for the team that captures it. We periodically tally the point total for each server and add that total to their War Score, which accumulates over the length of a persistent two-week battle."
"At the end of each battle, every team is given a new ranking. Once a battle ends and team rankings are updated, servers are matched up based on their new ranking and a new battle commences."
I kinda wonder how they're going to solve it. Will there be queueing after a certain amount of players from 1 server is reached? Or will it be unlimited?
Even if a cap is high, the likeliest moment that it'll be reached will probably be at launch when servers are filled to bursting and whole hordes will want to try out the Mists.
Ah, so you are worried that there wont be enough slots for all to get into a world fight. I can see that as an issue, but if keeping them full at 100,200, or 300 players on a server means que waiting times. Then I dont see that as an issue tbh. If a server has 2000-3000 players, its doubtful there will be a mass of people trying to get in. Maybe a peak times.
Right, that's what I meant. Queue's would suck. If they could pull it off with there being no cap, and no queue's then I have no issues with the system.
The other problem I have is expecting guilds that fight each other in the competitive PVP to suddenly become friends and help each other in the WvWvW. There's clearly going to be trash talking, and grudges between guilds if they fight each other in the competitive PVP, and then to have them world together in the world PVP just doesn't seem realistic to me lol. Maybe the competitive PVP will be cross server, but I doubt it.
I guess this means I can finally talk about it? At least this portion?
If you played GW2 at a public event -- you can talk about what you experienced. If you played GW2 as part of a closed beta test -- then no, you cannot.
Comments
Of course you'll never have a 100 person versus 100 person battle but that isn't the point.
What matters is that there's up to 2000 people in the entire battle.
I don't play battlefield to have 32v32 fights, most are 1v1 or maybe 2v2. I play it to be part of a fight far bigger than myself. That's what WvW will be like. Also, a lot of anything is regurgitated systems, but note that no single game has ever done them all in one well done situation. Taking existing systems, polishing them and combining them with a purpose is how games evolve.
There is very little in the way of 'brand new' systems in any game.
Im going to assume you didnt read the article. Two weeks of continuos play. Realms are matched based on prior ranks. So yes, there will be multiple fights going on between like ranked worlds. Then after two weeks, they tally the scores, adjust your world's new rank, and then put you against other worlds more equal to yours, then start all over again.
I am pretty sure the maps are designed to have a changing population between off and peak hours. Plus darkfall has had a lot of over 100 vs 100 battles and they only sold about 100k copies. Given the fact you do not need a current subscription will also keep this full more often.
Omg...speechless
Ok yeah, that sounds incredible and brings back so many great memories from back-in-the-day playing Dark Age of Camelot.
And now that I think about it, thats the last MMO I enjoyed PvP in {or rather RvR} ~ same thing really. Ever since then I just never really enjoyed PvP because of the rather lackluster-small-scale battlefields and the few MMOs that tried open world PvP actually ended up being minimal and nobody ever did it much{WAR for example}. Another thing that drives me to ignore current PvP events is that it was so frustrating by constantly getting steamrolled from twinked players, or just in general because of AFKing bots and lazy players!
With this info on WvW, I think deep down inside me, a little kindling of PvP has reignited...holy crap I want to play this so bad now!
Very thrilled to see such a heavy DAOC influence here.
TwitchTV Partnered Streamer
MMORPG.com Spotlight Blog Writer
Co-Leader of Inquisition
Youtube Channel
Oh looky..Didn't take long lol.
Yup,i would say it's game, set and match.
I cant believe it. Im already so looking forward to GW2.
Now hearing this new information on GW2 with DAOC rvr style pvp is like my ultimate wet dream come true.
GW2 is shaping up to be the greatest mmo with what..NO SUB!
I love how ArenaNet is adding everything a mmo gamer can ever want and removing all the useless and annoying stuff.
oh i didn't expect any news untill the 21th
This all sounds too good to be true
, the only sad thing is we still don't know how big 'big' really is. (the maps)
To take another poster's term: I just had a wargasm myself!
It's going to be really tempting to make a character that just lives in the Mists from 1-80. I must resist!
for me yeah. i see some people are still meh, but whatever. all i know is that i'm going to be dreaming (during my classes) of wreaking havoc on supply lines while a massive seige grinds along in the distance. there are so many tactical and strategic possibilities that could come out of what they outlined in that blog it boggles the mind.
I did read the article. I meant multiple instances of the Mists due to it reaching it's cap of maximum number of players.
The reason why they released this news now, is to prepare us because we'll get to see it in all it's glory, from all the gameplay footage the press will get. Then you can judge whether the maps are large enough and other things.
everything anet has released has been very conservative. they've kept things quiet, only talking about the stuff that they will do. so when i see "over 100" that just means to me that they've so far managed over 100 players on one map, and that they intend to raise the number. while this is only (hopeful) speculation, i would say that they're aiming for at least 500 players per map if not more. but i agree the possibility of instances does put me on edge (what's the point of fighting for that tower if, the next time you play, you are in a different instance and it's gone? and how would they even score three servers playing against each other in three different instances?). however, from what we've seen them do so far, i trust them to come up with a great solution if there is a problem with the cap.
I doubt they would do that and the cap is 2,000 players for now (500 per map) and the fact that you can attack other home server's Borderlands and how there is a reason in doing so, I think players will be spread out and the cap won't be reached so easily.
Ah, so you are worried that there wont be enough slots for all to get into a world fight. I can see that as an issue, but if keeping them full at 100,200, or 300 players on a server means que waiting times. Then I dont see that as an issue tbh. If a server has 2000-3000 players, its doubtful there will be a mass of people trying to get in. Maybe a peak times.
i just nerdgasmed. wow i mean wow this sounds incredible as if this game could not get any better .... they go an release this.
wtb beta invite
I guess this means I can finally talk about it? At least this portion?
but is a cap of 2,000 enough to meet demand from three servers is the question. (especially after this reveal). i am hopeful though.
really, really good point. we don't know what the pop on a server will be yet, either.
That was clearly explained:
"Each objective on a map is worth points for the team that captures it. We periodically tally the point total for each server and add that total to their War Score, which accumulates over the length of a persistent two-week battle."
"At the end of each battle, every team is given a new ranking. Once a battle ends and team rankings are updated, servers are matched up based on their new ranking and a new battle commences."
Even if a cap is high, the likeliest moment that it'll be reached will probably be at launch when servers are filled to bursting and whole hordes will want to try out the Mists.Right, that's what I meant. Queue's would suck. If they could pull it off with there being no cap, and no queue's then I have no issues with the system.
The other problem I have is expecting guilds that fight each other in the competitive PVP to suddenly become friends and help each other in the WvWvW. There's clearly going to be trash talking, and grudges between guilds if they fight each other in the competitive PVP, and then to have them world together in the world PVP just doesn't seem realistic to me lol. Maybe the competitive PVP will be cross server, but I doubt it.
If you played GW2 at a public event -- you can talk about what you experienced. If you played GW2 as part of a closed beta test -- then no, you cannot.