Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Requiring PvP minigames is pretty stupid move Funcom
toadkiller
Member Posts: 148
This from IGN ---------------------------- -
"Funcom has implemented a priority structure. Whichever guild has members that fare better in the PvP minigames gets priority when determining who gets to lead a siege assault" ----------------------- -
I like the game Funcom , but turn it into a CTF grind requiring instance PvP over world PvP and it will be a temporary game at best
"Funcom has implemented a priority structure. Whichever guild has members that fare better in the PvP minigames gets priority when determining who gets to lead a siege assault" ----------------------- -
I like the game Funcom , but turn it into a CTF grind requiring instance PvP over world PvP and it will be a temporary game at best
Comments
I think perhaps you should post a link to the original article...
----------------------------------------------------------------
AMD FX-4300
8gb DDR 667
Nvidia GTX 770
Ya lots of unhappy people in the FC forums over this..
I wouldn't mind if it was part of a forumla to decide who gets to attack a keep.. along with number of players, average level etc.. but the deciding factor alone is pretty lame.
well it was released yesterday so it's current. It won't sit well with people who aren't into minigames I guess.
No actually this is a great system for determinign who will get a shot at sieging a battlekeep first.
If you have more matches win you get to have a higher prioroty at sieging. You dont have to do those minigames, but you will then have to wait in longer queue to raid someone else's battlekeep.
Or at least thats how I got it.
While I would prefer CTF crap to not count at all , I'd agree that they should at least compromise and make it where your world PvP count matters as much ,
It's beyond stupid to make it solely based on battleground grinding - hello Honor points - bleh.
And it's not only on the public Age of Conan boards that it's getting irate replies , there's another certain board that has the overwhelming majority of posters saying bad idea.
They still have time to change the system - maybe they'll wise up
Actually, it gives the guild with the best PvP minigamers the first shot. The best PvP guild may be the one that does it in the wild.
Apply lemon juice and candle flame here to reveal secret message.
Rewarding Mini-game PVP is BS.......Shake your heads Funcom.
Guilds that sign up for Siege should have to PVP against the other guilds for priority. That could be in a mini-game setting.
What the Hell should capturing flags have to do with siege warfare?
I know that assumption is never a good thing, but it seems that Funcom doesn't want to have FFA attacks on cities.
The guild that gets attack priority is the one who's MEMBERS have the highest MINI GAME scores.
Meaning guilds will recruit only the players who farm the damn mini-games non stop.
Meaning that if you want to participate in sieges, you will spend all your damn time in the mini-games.
Meaning that everyone will be playing the minigames all the time, and the rest of the world will be populated by lowbies trying to level up....to participate in LVL80 minigames.
BAD. BAD. BAD.
However....NONE OF THIS IS SET IN STONE.
We can change this system if we are vocal enough in our protest.
Head to the AoC forums and make your voice heard. WE CAN make a difference.
There are 9 battlekeeps people. If you get locked out by a bigger PvP raiding guild, go to the next one.
The concept is rather simple actually. Jeez.
ouch, and i thought funcom was the anti blizzard, guess i was wrong
Why are pvp mini games and sieging even associated that doesn't make alot of sense... Clearly everyone taking part in a siege isn't going to be a pvp guru.
Don't confuse a players ability, with a class being Over Powered.
-T
the issue here isn't guild size, it's guild qualification.
I really wish developers would have the ability to think things through that players have.
CH, Jedi, Commando, Smuggler, BH, Scout, Doctor, Chef, BE...yeah, lots of SWG time invested.
Once a denizen of Ahazi
Hate to be the one to say "told you so" but it was quite obvious from way back that the game's overall design is standing on glass legs...
I have no idea how they're going to get out of this fundamental flaw in their open-world PvP design without turning everything into an instance grindefest or FFA sieging where the guild that sleeps the least wins.
Anyway you turn it, you'll have to be a grind drone in some guild in order to occasionally do what you largely bought the game for - open world PvP sieges. PvE might be a bit better - if you like raiding.
A pity. I'll buy the game for its leveling part, but the moment guild slavery becomes mandatory for further meaningful play it's adios amigos for me.
Funcom made the right decision. Why does the OP disagree?
I don't like pvp minigames, and I don't see the problem.
No offense OP, but this post seems to be a little silly. If you want to LEAD a siege, you SHOULD be a badass battle commander. And in order to be a badass battle commander, you would've had to proven yourself in actual combat.
If you want to lead people into battle, why would they follow you unless you prove you can kick ass and take names?
Requiring PVP-Mini Games to be selected as one of the best in pvp in your guild, and allowed by funcom to lead a siege, seems perfectly reasonable to me.
I am a PK at heart, not a pvp game fan. I stalk and murder other players in the game world. If I see you complaining in the forest to your buddies about not being able to lead 40 people into battle because you either suck at pvp minigames or are too lazy to enter pvp minigames, I will not only PK you, I will get drunk and piss on your corpse.
"Sometimes, things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. People are basically good. Honor, courage, virtue mean everything. Power and money, money and power mean nothing. Good always triumphs over evil. Love, True Love Never Dies."
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
hey guy, you don't have to do any pvp minigames to be in a siege. You just have to be good at pvp minigames to Lead a siege. You can still siege and world pvp all you want without ever entering a pvp minigame.
"Sometimes, things that may or may not be true are the things a man needs to believe in the most. People are basically good. Honor, courage, virtue mean everything. Power and money, money and power mean nothing. Good always triumphs over evil. Love, True Love Never Dies."
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Well first of all there are what 9 keep sites per server. So this system doesn't really even come into play until there are more than 18 guilds involved in siege warfare. This is going to be more of a problem on pvp servers since many of them are more interested in open world pvp than minigames. It would make more sense to give the guild with the highest pvp rating priority (on pvp servers anyway)
I would rather have it set up so that the guilds wanting to attack the same keep could square off in a pvp mingame each pick your best 20 people or something like that.
I can't say I like this idea either, but to say that you will have to live in minigames to get a chance to fight for a keep is a bit overstated at this point to be fair about it. The server size will play a part in this too. I haven't seen anything on what the capacity will be in this game.
Anyone who equates grinding CTF instances = "badass commander" ........................well I guess I cannot even comprehend your thought process
hey guy, you don't have to do any pvp minigames to be in a siege. You just have to be good at pvp minigames to Lead a siege. You can still siege and world pvp all you want without ever entering a pvp minigame.
Might be I'm jumping the gun. However it all seems too contrived to me - scheduled open world PvP? What's the point of open world PvP then? Anywayz, I'm giving it benefit of a doubt - I'll play it and I'll be really glad if I'm proven wrong.
It ain't over till the fat lady sings.
if ur a bad ass guild and you want to take out another bad ass guild, You should be able to fight that guild and other's while your all trying to take/defend the keep. thats how it should be instead of the CtF, that doesnt show anything. just means you either have better gear, or more time on your hands.
hey guy, you don't have to do any pvp minigames to be in a siege. You just have to be good at pvp minigames to Lead a siege. You can still siege and world pvp all you want without ever entering a pvp minigame.
well, if you don't participate in PVP minigames, you don't get to siege...so your argument has no logic.There is plenty of PVP in AOC besides the mini-games...World PVP, BK, etc. Why should mini-game score have precedence over these?
Rewards for mini-games should be limited to badges, titles, etc. Running 50 CTF maps per day should not be a requirement to be selected as a siege attacker.
Repost from AoC Official forums.
Credit to Shannong.
The minigame mechanics that you are proposing in the April 25th IGN article are fine for the PvE servers, but these same mechanics are anathema to the FFA servers. It has been far too long since any decent MMO has provided true FFA PvP environments. Vanguard tried but Vanguard is a failed MMO for a variety of reasons. EVE succeeded in this area, but EVE is a very niche MMO. Shadowbane tried but Shadowbane is also a failed MMO for a variety of reasons.
The last truly successful MMOs that implemented 100% FFA PvP were UO and Asheron's Call 1. That's it. It's been far too many years since those good times, and many of us have been hoping that Funcom was finally bringing back true 100% FFA PvP servers as part of their server mix for AoC.
From an FFA PvPer's perspective, here is what is wrong with your seige priority system based on a guilds collective minigame rankings:
A. It will stifle the incentive to do World PvP. As crappy as WoW world PvP was, at least they actually had some world PvP happening before they implemented the Battlegrounds. Post Battlegrounds, there was no world PvP to be found anywhere at any time. We FFA PvPers have been waiting a long time for a game that would give us true world PvP again. Many of us were so desperate for true world PvP that we tried to make a go of Vanguard. Yes, we were that desperate.
B. It will stifle the development of complex and dynamic political structures and alliances. Ask anyone who's played on a real 100% FFA PvP server. The politics that arises is half the fun. There's no higher drama than the guild vs guild dynamics that can develop in a true FFA environment. With your proposed system, the serious guilds will be expending far too much effort trying to grind up their mini-game ratings. How will political dynamics develop when your guild's mini-game rating matters FAR more than being good at developing strong political alliances?
C. FFA PvPers do not want to be tossed into random PUGs and do their fighting in artificial scenarios. That is complete anathema to an FFA PvPer. We want to fight *alongside our guildmates and allies* against all the enemies on our KOS list. Period. End of Story. Real FFP PvPers laugh at the concept of minigames. Sure we might play now and then just for grins but the thought of being forced to grind up rankings in such a system is completely distasteful to an FFA PvPer.
I could go on but those three points alone are the deal-breakers for your proposed system on FFA servers. Really, you MUST rethink this approach.
At the very least, don't tie PvP rankings only to mini-game XP... Give players a choice of developing their rankings through world PvP instead. And what was wrong with your system in Anarchy Online anyway? When your guild owned an installation, you knew when you're vulnerable periods were and you just planned to be ready to defend during those periods. Got the entire server mad at you and the zerg from Hell was headed towards your installation? Too bad... that's what you get for not having enough allies to help you defend.
LET US WRITE OUR OWN DESTINY on FFA servers! Don't try to make us jump through flaming hoops like circus dogs.
quit trying to compare it to the honor system in WoW...if you suck in pvp in AoC you will never be high level no matter how many hours you sink into