Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
PvP: Conan vs WAR
Mihos
Member Posts: 24
So which do you all think it's going to be?
Here is what I like for Conan:
* Player built cities & city siege. Sounds like Shadowbane taken into modern gaming.
* Mature Rating.
*Real-time combat. Does anyone know if it's really like a FPS?
Here is what I like for Warhammer:
*Campaign battles. Fighting for dominance over the world with a capital city at stake sounds fun.
*No PvP zones. Warhammer looks as though it's created a seamless world where there are no barriers for PvP.
Personally the flavor of Conan appeals to me more but I'll play whichever has the best PvP. So what do you all think? Which will reign as PvP king? Or is it comparing apples to oranges?
Comments
Ummmm.....what?
I'll be able to give you a positive answer when Funcom demos their pvp content at the Games Day Event in Germany.
At the moment, my opinion on the matter is 'No feature exists until I see proof that it exists'. We've heard them talk the talk but they havent actually shown it yet.
Assuming AoC has everything in they promised, and it works well then I would say GUILD PVP sounds more fun in Conan, on the basis of its player cities and such. But casual or non-guild pvp sounds more fun in WAR, as its more accessible to everyone and you can jump right in.
Personally I look forward to whichever supports the least 1v1 battles, and focuses more on strategys and large battles or Guerrilla warfare *kind of like oblivion*
To correct your 2nd statement on WAR, their will be boundaries, the zones connect at a certain area at which players may pvp in, if players remaind out of these zones, then they can pve with no risks. I belive that the pvp areas take up larger portions of the zones as you progress though.
Ummmm.....what?
Unlike some MMOs, where you have to go to a certain "zone" to PvP. Warhammer appears to have no pvp zones. The entire world is fair game for PvP. It's a good thing
Thanks for letting me know! I'm sorry to hear that though
Ummmm.....what?
Unlike some MMOs, where you have to go to a certain "zone" to PvP. Warhammer appears to have no pvp zones. The entire world is fair game for PvP. It's a good thing
That isn't entirely true. At the lower levels, there is a percentage of each zone made up of pvp enabled and pve areas. It starts out at something like 80% pve 20% pve in the noob area progressively becoming more pvp oriented until the end game areas which are 80% pvp 20% pve.
I was confused because they specifically said that they have a zone in which pvp is allowed. If you get near it, big letters appear on the screen TELLING you that you are about to enter a zone, with a timer even. Am I missing something here?
Thanks for letting me know! I'm sorry to hear that though
Anytime
It did disappoint me just a tad bit as well but meh..we'll see how it works out I guess
Personally, I'm craving the real-time combat of AoC. Although real-time combat may turn out to be too annoying if there is the slightest lag..
I'm just hoping AoC isn't limited with its skill system, meaning will it just become a "real-time hack n' slash"?
Since WAR uses the traditional hot bar system with key activated skills, it may be alot easier to keep a steady playerbase. With AoC, alot of players may find themselves getting sick of the real-time combat and wanting to go back to their "tried and tested" hot bar MMOs.
That being said, both MMOs look to offer great PVP features. I honestly can't decide between either atm.
The thing I am looking forward to with AoC is the new combat system. Reminds me of say Oblivion and Fable mixed. I have grown so insanely bored of the standard mmo combat system, and that type of combat was garbage when it came to pvp anyway.
Conan's combat system REALLY appeals to me and I absolutely cannot wait to play it. Finally, a real different mmo. WAR will no doubt feel much like playing WoW, or EQ2, of Vanguard, or LoTRO...that style absolutely blows imo so that turns me away from WAR entirely. I will not be trying it for any reason. The combat system alone is what'll make me not try it. You spend a good majority of the game in combat, you best enjoy the way you do it. I no longer want to be bored auto attacking
Conan will have FFA PvP server, War will not, making Conan much more attractive.
TwitchTV Partnered Streamer
MMORPG.com Spotlight Blog Writer
Co-Leader of Inquisition
Youtube Channel
Warhammer is what I'm waiting for personally. Key reason being the lore behind Warhammer just sucks me in a lot more than that of Conan. Along with some intense RvR, public quests, Exp gain through PvP, large scale city raids, and of course, WAAAGGH!!!
And if i recall right fable had level system in it while AoC dont have a level system in it, and oblivion were skill based ( sandbox game ) like AoC is gonna be made.
And yea in AoC you actually have to aim so no more mashing buttons and then just think your hitting all the right keys
, gonna be awesome.
List of SOE lies
I can already see this 'innovative' new combat system failing hard. From what it looks like, this encourages button mashing to a mroe extreme level. Everyone's going to have their one combo that's better than all their others, and so will only use that one combo. Instead of mashing F2, F4, F5, it'll be Up Up Left Right. Throw in connection issues and you have yourself a recipe for disaster.
On the other hand, the AoC staff could pull everything off wonderfully and redefine MMO combat. That's the tricky part; knowing how the game will turn out before it turns out.
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain ~ Time to toss the dice
Death is light as a feather, duty heavier than a mountain.
going for aoc all the way. more sandboxed than war which i love
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
Its going to end up being every time you fight something your just gonna be doing the same combo over and over.
And I think the pvp is gonna be really wierd if the two toons are just standing there doing there combo's. IMO I think
they should have implemented a dodge/parry key. That goes for the melee classes though. I think the spellcasters
will be really fun and interesting with their spellweaving. So thats what I will most likely be. But I guess ill just have
to wait and see.
Both of these games sound great. Only thing Im worried about is the combat in AOC. I dont want to work at playing a game. However, AOC is set to release before Warhammer so I can try both. Of course I will only be trying one If AOC is that good
.
You dont want to have to work? By work do you mean play the game? Since when were games with no interactivity even called games, I believe people call them movies.
Anyways when someone convinces me theres a reason to play an auto-attack pvp game where basically no skill is involved ill be sticking with AoC, and hopefully monster hunter frontier when it comes out here.
Guild vs Guild will always be far more interesting than side vs. side. Far more drama, politics, opportunity to distinguish oneself, comraderie...
But that is assuming both games can deliver on their ambitions. I wager WAR will have a much easier time delivering on their promises than AOC will on theirs.
And if i recall right fable had level system in it while AoC dont have a level system in it, and oblivion were skill based ( sandbox game ) like AoC is gonna be made.
And yea in AoC you actually have to aim so no more mashing buttons and then just think your hitting all the right keys
, gonna be awesome.
What you are talking about? Where you got your informations? Almost everything you wrote is just wrong.First of Lilfurbal talked about Combat, and just combat, and i guess his compare with Fable and Oblivion is at least not completely wrong, even noone can say it exactly, because noone played AoC.. except the AoC staff.
Second, AoC is a level based game, not a skilled based game. And AoC is not a sandox, at least not really, maybe the borderkingdom instances have a little bit of a sandbox approach. But well, it is just a instance.. a game in the game.
And about the actually aiming? well.. noone knows really at the moment. As much as i know they hit automaticly everything in front of you, and they have even a hard lock, to lock up your target. So well, as i said, noone knows how it is really.
Ok first of all i must say that Comparing these games PvP isant a good idea as we know very little about AOC's.
What i like about AOC's PVP
- It has a new war of aproaching the controll of PvP [the button setup].
-Its in real time.
- Its Guild Based.
- Its Free for all.
What i dont like about AOC's PVP.
- It depends too much on the gore factor.
- The button setup system could turn into a button mashing game with faverout combos.
- Its not family friendly.
- I heard it has Instances.
What i like about WAR's PvP.
-It uses a RvR system
- Its not free for all.
- Its easy to get into
- Its family friendly
- Its classes have some good ideas such as a healer thats a great healer but also a decent fighter.
What i dont like about WAR's pvp.
- Its simplistic in some areas.
- No free for all pvp.
- It is partly item centric.
- There are instances.
"Kill one man, and you are a murderer. Kill millions of men, and you are a conqueror. Kill them all, and you are a god."
-- Jean Rostand
-----------------------------------------
WAR is coming, are you prepared?
-----------------------------------------
Not saying the game will suck... but it's not the innovative skill based game people are making it out to be(except for the ranged people...but have fun with that if it's anything like ddo it's going to be a bigger hastle to be ranged without being massively more effective)
had to point out you contradicted yourself there
im kind of torn between WAR and AOC
i think AOC will be the better game but WAR will have much more people playing it
i don't like WAR's graphics much, the terrain is really unappealing
It is partly item centric. I do not know where you got that but its false
Its pretty none geared structured.