Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
New City Siege Plans for WAR
Rohn
Member UncommonPosts: 3,730
The link takes you to the plans they have for the new city siege.
http://forums.warhammeronline.com/warhammer/board/message?board.id=dev_discussions&thread.id=8243
It's too long to really cut and paste.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Comments
Yeah, was just looking over those too. Looks like its gonna be a lot of fun, i like the idea of the players becoming Champions, as well as the escorting the warlords and keeping your siege weapon NPCs alive.
The proposed changes look a LOT better than the city siege has ever been.
Up until now, it's never felt like the attackers were really attacking a city. It had a very simplistic, "gamey" feel. Hopefully, this will be a start in making the city siege feel a lot more like an attack and defense.
We'll see. Like I said, it looks much better on paper than the current form. Of course, honestly, it would be hard to make it worse.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
City sieges will now be a 24 versus 24 battle.
That right there will keep me from wasting anymore of my money on the game again. WAR was always advertised as the game with large scale massive RvR battles. Why are city sieges just small scale instanced PvP?
The rest of it looks neat. I think they just need to kill the instancing and bring back the massive RvR battles. You can have several hundred people in a T4 zone fighting for the keeps so why limit the city siege to a small instance?
Because there is NO GAME on Earth that can handle 1000v1000 battles. I have seen 500vs500 battles in the lakes without crashing and that is the most impressive I have ever seen of a MMORPG. The new stablity IMO is better than the 1000vs1000 battles in EVE because EVE has no acutally terrian maps and not 1000 abilities with 1000 different buff/debuffs the servers have to handle. Image the game gets a BOOST in population just for the 4 servers where numbers would exceed 1000vs1000 numbers, it just wouldn't work out.
This system is like a controlled BG from W.o.W and if implemented right it could end of being fun. The downside is most are already soverign and most players want new content not redesigned content.
Proof of the pudding is in the eating, but it sounds fun!
I have been as critical of this game as most - but in theory at least, this looks like a HUGE improvement.
I wish I could say I was confident that they can get it working properly.
GL to them, and if I hear good things, I WILL RESUB to try this out.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Yes, it does, and grats on getting that saying correct. Most people misquote it.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
I completely agree. Maybe they finally found someone who knows about war games in this Mike Wyatt guy. I think he is new. I don't recognize his name, in any case.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Yes. See - that is the big problem with making end game rewards permanent items - once you get your set, there is no reason to go through it again. The reward for all RvR should be realm benefits and temporary items that have to be replaced.
I hate to admit it, but I am cautiously optimistic about this game now. I never thought I would say that.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
24vs24 is better than 48vs48, in orvr you can still enjoy the randomness and all, now you can be sure that it's your warband in the instance.
Have to say that I love what they are doing, only thing that worries me a bit is that will it be more difficult to get gear now? It's all about fun anyway.
One of the biggest worries in the offical thread right now is exactly the concern that you are *not* able to enter with a Warband.
So where did you see that it was?
Personally, I don't believe in the inherent "greatness" of massive battles. Certainly, the fantasy of such battles sounds fantastic on paper, but doesn't translate well into reality.
While there can indeed be hundreds of players fighting in the zones, one of the most common complaints about WAR has been the "zergy" nature of unregulated RvR combat. In fact, good, challenging fights in the zones between massive armies has been a rare occurence in WAR since launch - with the norm being one side outnumbering the other, usually resulting in a lop-sided slaughter. Most people don't seem to enjoy that.
This isn't a problem unique to WAR - other games with open fighting have proven to be just as susceptible to the negative effects of the zerg. Unless a game can ensure some type of parity between sides, it'll always be a problem.
The planned changes for WAR sound interesting. We'll have to wait and see how it plays, though.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Personally the 24v24 part is the best part because it will promote 24+ man guilds. The reason there are so many pugs these days because everyone want's to be a damn guild leader. It will ATLEAST support more action within alliance warband and if this ends up being extremely FUN then all they have to do is tweek the LAKES (CarrieG said they have alot comming for T4 lakes in PTS Ventrilo) and it should attract a lot of new customers and a lot of old because everyone left for 3 damn reasons.
End-game was lame. (Could end up changing. )
T4 Lakes has a couple problems.
Performance (IMO It has been fixed. Don't mind them continuing to work on it because it will make more room for bigger ORVR encounters. 600vs600 is max before servers crash.)
I played War for a year and whilst these change slook good,well we've heard promises of fixing the end game before with no real results.Even if they do finally make City Sieges actualyl fun and worth doing there's still the fact that it will be nearly 2 years after launch that they finally fixed their broken end game mechanics...shoudl they be cheered for that?
No, they shouldn't be cheered for that. But actually if the game becomes better, then it will be cheered by those who still play.
Fair enough.Hopefully it marks a chang eof direction in the development of the game.This is what they should of being doing after launch along side the stability and performance improvements.If they'd done that instead of concentrating on new classes and thne haivng to spend months balnacing everytihng further because of them,well I tihnk War would be in a much healthier state and have kept much more of it's initial subscribers.
You can have those massive battles in RvR lakes if you want. But right now ppl try to avoid those massive fights as much as possible. Because after 3-4 wbs on each side it turns into a Zerg(unorganized) battle. Also that is the sweet point for non-laggy play(at least for me) (mid range computer).
And the game is also based on warbands(24 ppl). So i see no problem here.
Anyways about the changes, they look really good. Hope that goes live as polished as possible.
And some of us will come back.
"" Voice acting isn't an RPG element....it's just a production value." - grumpymel2
Extreme much? Quite a leap from 48 to 1000. There's probably a few points inbetween that could qualify the game as a massive multiplayer. 24 vs 24 is a poke in the eye to anyone who is trying to follow Warhammer.
There are quite a few numbers that could fit between the two. 48 on 48 seemed pretty good, so I'm not sure why the reduction - assuming balancing or tuning issues here, but only Mythic knows.
Regarding the lament over a loss of "massiveness", consider some other numbers, like: 48 on 0, 100 on 24, 4 warbands on 1 and a half. While it may seem sexy to talk about massive numbers, the reality has been imbalanced sides much more often than not. The resulting zerg has been a much worse "poke in the eye" for those following and playing Warhammer, in my opinion.
Like it or not, better balanced sides leads to better fights. Few seem to really enjoy the zerg.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Good points, I agree.
So basically GW and WoW have been getting it right all along.
Not ORvR, but controlled BG's
It's sad to think MMO PvP has gone backwards in the last decade since Daoc, rather than forwards. Probably because the people playing it simply expect more and more every day. We want everything to be equal for everyone more and more every day.
I think games of the past are often grossly over-glorified with the golden-hued tint of nostalgia. The landscape and playerbase of the MMO space has expanded and diversified greatly since games like UO and DAOC came out. The parochial "old-timers" lament the change, yearning for the good ol' days.
The funny thing is that the games of old were niche, even back then. They just had a lot less competition, so there were far fewer choices or alternatives available to players. Not so, anymore.
What's challenging about destroying another force that you outnumber 3 to 1? Nothing.
Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.
Not in that sense no, but getting to the relic keep, taking it down and getting back before a good force prevented you from doing so, with preparation in the days/weeks before (taking/losing keeps etc), there was certainly a good feeling to that.
It's long gone now, I don't disagree with you there. That there was less choice, that's just another issue related I think. Basically most of us were happy with how the game played back then. Yet if a game that had the same imbalanced stuff in it today (because well, there was, alot) it would have a still birth.
We expect different stuff now, and we want so many controls and everything to be perfect in so many ways, that there's really very little left in the sense of "RVR".
Fantasy Earth Zero seems to have taken a bigger step towards RvR than any of the pay to play MMO stock seems to be doing. It at least has 5 factions with maps to really fight over as far as I can tell. None of this flipping switches till you reach the end and then start over again.