It can work, but it would be so much better with 3 factions. The 2 factions thing is imo starting to get old, something even a bit different would be so good.
Currently playing: N/A Retired from: GW, WAR, Aion, LOTRO, Rift, SW:TOR, Vinductus
Warhammer online did this mistake and added PvP with 2 factions, and well they did not succeed very well with that. If you want a faction based game you always should have atleast odd numbers in factions, that way you will always have the possibility of the last faction being able to turn the tables PvP wise. It could be that they help another faction or they simply attack one faction without being allied to the other. Making a faction based PvP MMO with just 2 factions is stupidity at the highest level. Players will always join the strongest side as no one enjoys getting owned daily.
All 3 factions in DAoC were 1 race, human. . In 40K, you'll have cool races that might attract more players. . In WoW, 2/3rds of typical server populations wanted to play the alliance faction because alliance had cool looking races. . So Blizz added pretty blood elves to the horde side to balance things. that worked, but the kind of people who wanted to play pretty blood elves weren't the horde faction's kind of people. . Anyway, 3 factions would be a huge, possibly game breaking experiment. It's not your money.
In 40K, you'll have cool races that might attract more players.
.
In WoW, 2/3rds of typical server populations wanted to play the alliance faction because alliance had cool looking races.
.
So Blizz added pretty blood elves to the horde side to balance things. that worked, but the kind of people who wanted to play pretty blood elves weren't the horde faction's kind of people.
.
Anyway, 3 factions would be a huge, possibly game breaking experiment. It's not your money.
oh really? I didn't know that.
Originally posted by Spathotan The simplest way to put this, is like this. Buying a used/refurbished 360 is on the same plane as sharing a condom in a gangbang with strangers.
two factions is just easy way. yes, it will work, it will make money, but it will fade into mediocrity of theme-park railroads, a pale shadow of what could be done.
well havent read the whole thing but my idea is that the best thing to do is to
have the 2 factions to co-op meaning the order races to be able to enter the cities of all the order races and so on
while at the same time the pvp is open so even thought you can enter in the eldar or imperial guard teritorie(with the rep or equivalent quest)what you do out in the open is a diferent thing(hence the whole 40 feeling of everyone killing everyone)
So you (OP) are saying that the races would be for example: Space marines, Imperial guard and Eldar versus: Chaos marines, Orks and Dark eldar.
Then for some reason the IG says "Screw you guys we are joining the other team"
Dont see how that would fit with the lore...
No you said those where the 6 armys involved, I said the devs would have to be careful picking armys so that a change was logical. (Skim back about ~15-20 posts its there somewhere) At no point in the OP did I list any faction breakdowns.
It can work, but it would be so much better with 3 factions. The 2 factions thing is imo starting to get old, something even a bit different would be so good.
While I've said more than once that I am happy to support a 3-faction system (being a long time DAoC player) it seems from the 40K website that it will be a 2-faction game.
"Side with the forces of Order, or the vile hosts of Destruction, in a war that will unlock ancient secrets, reveal dark purposes, and determine the fate of the Sargos Sector. For in this dark millennium, there is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter."
Taken from thier website, seems to imply two factions no?
This is why I started a discussion about how a 2-faction system could be changed to try and keep a population balance and game flare, rather than the old "fixed 2-faction system" which I think most of us hear agree is not an ideal situation for a PvP based game. (Assuming from the IP that it will be a pretty heavy PvP driven game)
I'm not touting my solution as the only one, or a perfect solution, but I've not really seen anyone else offer anything better as of yet. Take on-board that the game seems to be heading in a 2-faction direction and from that standpoint discuss how a 2-faction system "could" work within the game structure ... rather than just yelling "3-factions or bust" as many seem to be saying here (not you Ros, but its a common trend on this thread)
For Example, Have 2 factions with 3 "races" each. Each race would have its own starting area and low level PvE zone. Higher level PvE zones would be interlinked based on the races current alleigance (Destruction or Order)
PvP would be an RvR type affair (See DAoC - Frontiers) with races fighting out there for control of resources.
If one side was out numbering the others the Devs could (by using a races ruling NPC (King Warlord etc) Swap a races alignment to balance the sides. Ie you'd now have a 4 races Vs 2 races situation. This would be explained in game via announcements to each side ("The Eldar have shown thier true colours and fled to Destructions side" .... "The Loyal Eldar have returned to the fold" etc)
Whoever said that should go for a bath in the Gulf of Mexico. With lighted torches in his hands. Thank you for understanding.
Yes interesting comment, totally unrelated to the topic but whatever ..
You seem to be against scenerio based PvP (Gated PvP as I call it .. 40 a side or W/E as in WoW / WAR etc) and you appear to love open RvR, but you hate the 2 faction system. I deduce this from your post in the 2-factions thread -
"War isn't "fair" nor is a soccer game you "arrange". It's about tactics and strategy. With instanced pvp you just enqueue and then it's a grind. No objectives, no strategic decisions to make (where to strike, how many people to bring, diversions to make, surprise attacks, ambushes), it's just enter a small area, kill, die, rinse and repeat. "
You say war is'ent fair and I agree, however we're talking about a game the aim of which is to be "fun" for all involved. Having 2 factions (As it seems this game will have) in order to maintain the "Fun" element you need to ensure some form of population control. WAR failed at this and it was a major issue there, not the only issue, but a biggie. Just because the population of each side are about even does not preclude any of the actions you talk about, Suprise attacks, Ambushes etc.
You cant have it both ways. You either have a decent population control that maintains the "fun" element for both sides or you have one side running off with the ball because theres "no point" going out there and getting slaughtered.
If you'd bothered to read any of my posts in this thread you'd realize that I liked the 3-faction system and support it. You'd also realize that information in the 40K website seems to indicate (Currently) that this will be a 2-faction game. Since that appears to be the road this game is taking my post was aimed at trying to introduce some form of population control to a 2-faction system.
Now you can moan about 3-faction all you want, and personally as I've stated numorous times in this thread, I'd personally rather see a 3-faction system, but neither you nor I are controling the development of this game. So instead of making pretty worthless posts, either regale me with insight about how a 3-faction system is awsome (I'll prob agree since I already know that) or suggest some idears that will give an element of population control to a 2-faction system ... k ?
In response to the OP, as I didn't read the other 8 pages:
Your system is a good start to a step in the right direction, but something like that just could not work. Players wouldn't be able to form "guilds" across racial boundaries as the racial faction lines may change on a whim. You also have the issue of where people log out; if I'm playing Eldar and I log out in a town of imperial guard only to log in the next day and I'm no longer sided with them, I'd be furious. I'd prepared to work with the Imperial Guard, and bought all the things I wanted to, to find out now I'm sided with chaos? against my will?
A system like that doesn't work at its core because it takes the element of player choice out of the equation. I believe someone else mentioned a mercenary type system where the main battle was SM v CSM and the other races would act as mercenaries and choose their sides at will is a much better way to handle the situation. Because players would have that choice, it would be in their hands to play their character as they want.
My problem is, either way a system like that just does not work in the warhammer IP. Each craftworld, each chapter, each regiment has their own agenda. Most of the time operating independently unless it is absolutely necessary to side with a like-minded race on the issue.
To me, the best solution to a game like this from both a gameplay and lore point of view, is to allow players to draw the battle lines by creating their own "guilds" and "alliances". To further allow players the option to expand racial needs, but to limit lore infractions, they could keep the tenants of order v destro. And what I mean by that is only allowing "guilds" to be created by the races, but allow alliances to stretch across the order/destro lines. A player formed chapter of space marines allying with an eldar craftworld to control territory. Or a clan of ork boyz allying with a cabal of dark eldar to keep a growing imperial guard regiment out of their sector.
This would allow players to not only solve their own balance issues, but it would keep lore intact and provide a new and refreshing take on the MMO PvP systems. I really hope their devs take a look at these boards sometime.
MMOs played: Horizons, Auto Assault, Ryzom, EVE, WAR, WoW, EQ2, LotRO, GW, DAoC, Aion, Requiem, Atlantica, DDO, Allods, Earth Eternal, Fallen Earth, Rift Willing to try anything new
2 factions fail. always has always will. either go 3+ or make it FFA. FFA is more interesting imo where you see players sorting themselves out and it becomes more political. 3+ factions give you more of a safe factor while running around grinding than FFA.
Both said systems are fun as hell and way better than 2 faction. Sorry 40k if you go this route im not playing. Why does everyone take the warhammer IP and sh!t all over it by making it a 2 faction game and making the environment borderline childish.
Warhammer is the most grim universe there is basically, but they insist on following the wow crowd. F#CK YOU DEVS
Imperial Guard and Adeptus Astrates both serve the Imperium. Chaos Marines and Chaos Cultists both serve Khorne in this case (judging from the video).
Only the Orks are the ones which are their own faction by default, but I haven't heard any complaints from the community when Chaos used them as pawns in Dawn of war games - is is plausible than such arrangement could exist for awhile in the WH40k universe.
All other races haven't been announced as being playable in Dark Millennium, only that they are "represented" in the game.
If these are the races we are stuck with, then I don't see any major flaw in the way the games lore is tied with the WH40k universe, and since the story of Dark Millennium is going to be part of the official WH40k lore (as it was confirmed to be) I don't see how anyone can claim that when we only know so little of the game at this point.
Still, I would like the option to fight Chaos with my Ork characters just as much as I like fighting the Imperium, so I hope that such conflicts are possible occasionally, regardless that they belong to the same faction.
yep some sides no one would play and population would be low
but warhammer 40k had a way to level the battle field called equipment
and if at the start of some scenario
a side was issues with vechicle or hitech equipment
firstly the queing waiting for players is gone only 3 on ur side waiting to play and 21 on other well off u go
they could adust the equipment on a min by min basis and if one side suddenly fills up well the equipment malfunctions
then there would be more different battles a great defence with 3vs21 or a great attack 21 normal troops vs 3 tanks
also there would be so many different sides that it wouldnt become stale
also there could be mini alliances between factions lasting for a month or two then all change giving new challange to the game making the whole game fresh again
and these alliances should be done by players in a vote kinda system making the players
imagin the scenario 3 marines vs 20 orcs well they could all be issued with a tank or a dreadnaught depending on whats going on
it would mean no matter how many played a side u know there wouild be a chance to win
I posted this in responce to one of the 40K vid links.
"They could make a 2 faction system work if they had multiple races with-in each faction and the ability for races to individually change sides.
For Example, Have 2 factions with 3 "races" each. Each race would have its own starting area and low level PvE zone. Higher level PvE zones would be interlinked based on the races current alleigance (Destruction or Order)
PvP would be an RvR type affair (See DAoC - Frontiers) with races fighting out there for control of resources.
If one side was out numbering the others the Devs could (by using a races ruling NPC (King Warlord etc) Swap a races alignment to balance the sides. Ie you'd now have a 4 races Vs 2 races situation. This would be explained in game via announcements to each side ("The Eldar have shown thier true colours and fled to Destructions side" .... "The Loyal Eldar have returned to the fold" etc)
Races could switch sides even on balanced servers with two races switching sides at the same time. This would provide a unique dynamic within the game as former friends now became enemies etc.
Of course your "core" races would never switch (SM on order and CSM on destruction) but the other races could switch as required to maintain balance or just to switch up the sides.
Some players may get upset when thier side "switches" but its a historical fact that armys switch sides in War and you sux it up."
Do you think a system like this could work to balance a 2 faction PvP game?
Personally I think its a decent dynamic that would allow Devs to balance to games by swapping racial alliances and keep the game interesting as the could swap races on balanced servers also just to "shake things up".
Of course you'd need safeguards in play for example logging out in an "Order" PvE zone and having your race switch sides would mean that there would have to be a system in play to remove that character to your races home city or new faction city / base etc. Since they have these systems in place in older games (ie DAoC - logging out in a keep that flips) it would'ent be so hard.
Opinions?
You have very solid ideas, but here's the problem in general: Balance, Exploitation and Developer Execution.
After playing WAR for sometime you can easily see where the 2 faction system fails and why it fails.
1. Balance - Two factions can NEVER be balanced, it seems. One side will always seem to dominate another side. People generally don't want to be on the failboat, and will always somehow try to be on the winning side, ie Order dominating Destruction on some servers and vice versa in WAR (in essence, let me log on to my Order toon and ride the zerg). A model like DAOC just works better.
2. Exploitation - Here's where your ideas may fail. Even when implementing safeguards, someone, some way, some how, finds an exploit. Create any conditions you like, players find an exploit. The more you leave up to "creating a balance via a developer idea" and less of "make balance via a competitive 3 or more factions", players will exploit that. Just look at WAR. Its easier to exploit an underdog system, OP classes and overbalanced / underbalanced factions to get gear.
3. Developer Execution - But here's where those ideas will MOST likely fail. Let's say they have your ideas in place. What are it's percentage limits, aka "At what point do the Eldar switch over? Why are the Eldar switching over? Is it "lore factual?". How many times will this happen during a server day? Will a seperate dev team be able to watch over the servers and make this happen? Will it be done all the time, a week by week basis, month by month basis, etc. Is it done by current population real time? Is it done by whom is pushing their will more? Or is it because too many people are logging, hence creating a feel that one "realm" is underpowered? Long story short, how do the dev's sort through that and come to terms with it, and ultimately act on it?
All in all, they are great ideas and may be a ton of fun if implemented correctly. However, it leaves many questions and too much to chance. A three faction or multiple race system would easily iradicate imbalance and create an interesting dynamic. This is what most players would like to see.
Comments
It can work, but it would be so much better with 3 factions. The 2 factions thing is imo starting to get old, something even a bit different would be so good.
Currently playing: N/A
Retired from: GW, WAR, Aion, LOTRO, Rift, SW:TOR, Vinductus
Warhammer online did this mistake and added PvP with 2 factions, and well they did not succeed very well with that. If you want a faction based game you always should have atleast odd numbers in factions, that way you will always have the possibility of the last faction being able to turn the tables PvP wise. It could be that they help another faction or they simply attack one faction without being allied to the other. Making a faction based PvP MMO with just 2 factions is stupidity at the highest level. Players will always join the strongest side as no one enjoys getting owned daily.
All 3 factions in DAoC were 1 race, human.
.
In 40K, you'll have cool races that might attract more players.
.
In WoW, 2/3rds of typical server populations wanted to play the alliance faction because alliance had cool looking races.
.
So Blizz added pretty blood elves to the horde side to balance things. that worked, but the kind of people who wanted to play pretty blood elves weren't the horde faction's kind of people.
.
Anyway, 3 factions would be a huge, possibly game breaking experiment. It's not your money.
Well shave my back and call me an elf! -- Oghren
oh really? I didn't know that.
two factions is just easy way. yes, it will work, it will make money, but it will fade into mediocrity of theme-park railroads, a pale shadow of what could be done.
well havent read the whole thing but my idea is that the best thing to do is to
have the 2 factions to co-op meaning the order races to be able to enter the cities of all the order races and so on
while at the same time the pvp is open so even thought you can enter in the eldar or imperial guard teritorie(with the rep or equivalent quest)what you do out in the open is a diferent thing(hence the whole 40 feeling of everyone killing everyone)
No you said those where the 6 armys involved, I said the devs would have to be careful picking armys so that a change was logical. (Skim back about ~15-20 posts its there somewhere) At no point in the OP did I list any faction breakdowns.
While I've said more than once that I am happy to support a 3-faction system (being a long time DAoC player) it seems from the 40K website that it will be a 2-faction game.
"Side with the forces of Order, or the vile hosts of Destruction, in a war that will unlock ancient secrets, reveal dark purposes, and determine the fate of the Sargos Sector. For in this dark millennium, there is no peace amongst the stars, only an eternity of carnage and slaughter."
Taken from thier website, seems to imply two factions no?
This is why I started a discussion about how a 2-faction system could be changed to try and keep a population balance and game flare, rather than the old "fixed 2-faction system" which I think most of us hear agree is not an ideal situation for a PvP based game. (Assuming from the IP that it will be a pretty heavy PvP driven game)
I'm not touting my solution as the only one, or a perfect solution, but I've not really seen anyone else offer anything better as of yet. Take on-board that the game seems to be heading in a 2-faction direction and from that standpoint discuss how a 2-faction system "could" work within the game structure ... rather than just yelling "3-factions or bust" as many seem to be saying here (not you Ros, but its a common trend on this thread)
Yes interesting comment, totally unrelated to the topic but whatever ..
You seem to be against scenerio based PvP (Gated PvP as I call it .. 40 a side or W/E as in WoW / WAR etc) and you appear to love open RvR, but you hate the 2 faction system. I deduce this from your post in the 2-factions thread -
"War isn't "fair" nor is a soccer game you "arrange". It's about tactics and strategy. With instanced pvp you just enqueue and then it's a grind. No objectives, no strategic decisions to make (where to strike, how many people to bring, diversions to make, surprise attacks, ambushes), it's just enter a small area, kill, die, rinse and repeat. "
You say war is'ent fair and I agree, however we're talking about a game the aim of which is to be "fun" for all involved. Having 2 factions (As it seems this game will have) in order to maintain the "Fun" element you need to ensure some form of population control. WAR failed at this and it was a major issue there, not the only issue, but a biggie. Just because the population of each side are about even does not preclude any of the actions you talk about, Suprise attacks, Ambushes etc.
You cant have it both ways. You either have a decent population control that maintains the "fun" element for both sides or you have one side running off with the ball because theres "no point" going out there and getting slaughtered.
If you'd bothered to read any of my posts in this thread you'd realize that I liked the 3-faction system and support it. You'd also realize that information in the 40K website seems to indicate (Currently) that this will be a 2-faction game. Since that appears to be the road this game is taking my post was aimed at trying to introduce some form of population control to a 2-faction system.
Now you can moan about 3-faction all you want, and personally as I've stated numorous times in this thread, I'd personally rather see a 3-faction system, but neither you nor I are controling the development of this game. So instead of making pretty worthless posts, either regale me with insight about how a 3-faction system is awsome (I'll prob agree since I already know that) or suggest some idears that will give an element of population control to a 2-faction system ... k ?
In response to the OP, as I didn't read the other 8 pages:
Your system is a good start to a step in the right direction, but something like that just could not work. Players wouldn't be able to form "guilds" across racial boundaries as the racial faction lines may change on a whim. You also have the issue of where people log out; if I'm playing Eldar and I log out in a town of imperial guard only to log in the next day and I'm no longer sided with them, I'd be furious. I'd prepared to work with the Imperial Guard, and bought all the things I wanted to, to find out now I'm sided with chaos? against my will?
A system like that doesn't work at its core because it takes the element of player choice out of the equation. I believe someone else mentioned a mercenary type system where the main battle was SM v CSM and the other races would act as mercenaries and choose their sides at will is a much better way to handle the situation. Because players would have that choice, it would be in their hands to play their character as they want.
My problem is, either way a system like that just does not work in the warhammer IP. Each craftworld, each chapter, each regiment has their own agenda. Most of the time operating independently unless it is absolutely necessary to side with a like-minded race on the issue.
To me, the best solution to a game like this from both a gameplay and lore point of view, is to allow players to draw the battle lines by creating their own "guilds" and "alliances". To further allow players the option to expand racial needs, but to limit lore infractions, they could keep the tenants of order v destro. And what I mean by that is only allowing "guilds" to be created by the races, but allow alliances to stretch across the order/destro lines. A player formed chapter of space marines allying with an eldar craftworld to control territory. Or a clan of ork boyz allying with a cabal of dark eldar to keep a growing imperial guard regiment out of their sector.
This would allow players to not only solve their own balance issues, but it would keep lore intact and provide a new and refreshing take on the MMO PvP systems. I really hope their devs take a look at these boards sometime.
MMOs played: Horizons, Auto Assault, Ryzom, EVE, WAR, WoW, EQ2, LotRO, GW, DAoC, Aion, Requiem, Atlantica, DDO, Allods, Earth Eternal, Fallen Earth, Rift
Willing to try anything new
2 factions fail. always has always will. either go 3+ or make it FFA. FFA is more interesting imo where you see players sorting themselves out and it becomes more political. 3+ factions give you more of a safe factor while running around grinding than FFA.
Both said systems are fun as hell and way better than 2 faction. Sorry 40k if you go this route im not playing. Why does everyone take the warhammer IP and sh!t all over it by making it a 2 faction game and making the environment borderline childish.
Warhammer is the most grim universe there is basically, but they insist on following the wow crowd. F#CK YOU DEVS
Two factions can work lore wise.
Imperial Guard and Adeptus Astrates both serve the Imperium. Chaos Marines and Chaos Cultists both serve Khorne in this case (judging from the video).
Only the Orks are the ones which are their own faction by default, but I haven't heard any complaints from the community when Chaos used them as pawns in Dawn of war games - is is plausible than such arrangement could exist for awhile in the WH40k universe.
All other races haven't been announced as being playable in Dark Millennium, only that they are "represented" in the game.
If these are the races we are stuck with, then I don't see any major flaw in the way the games lore is tied with the WH40k universe, and since the story of Dark Millennium is going to be part of the official WH40k lore (as it was confirmed to be) I don't see how anyone can claim that when we only know so little of the game at this point.
Still, I would like the option to fight Chaos with my Ork characters just as much as I like fighting the Imperium, so I hope that such conflicts are possible occasionally, regardless that they belong to the same faction.
omg they missed a really good chance here
instead of 2 sides they should have had 6 or 8
yep some sides no one would play and population would be low
but warhammer 40k had a way to level the battle field called equipment
and if at the start of some scenario
a side was issues with vechicle or hitech equipment
firstly the queing waiting for players is gone only 3 on ur side waiting to play and 21 on other well off u go
they could adust the equipment on a min by min basis and if one side suddenly fills up well the equipment malfunctions
then there would be more different battles a great defence with 3vs21 or a great attack 21 normal troops vs 3 tanks
also there would be so many different sides that it wouldnt become stale
also there could be mini alliances between factions lasting for a month or two then all change giving new challange to the game making the whole game fresh again
and these alliances should be done by players in a vote kinda system making the players
imagin the scenario 3 marines vs 20 orcs well they could all be issued with a tank or a dreadnaught depending on whats going on
it would mean no matter how many played a side u know there wouild be a chance to win
You have very solid ideas, but here's the problem in general: Balance, Exploitation and Developer Execution.
After playing WAR for sometime you can easily see where the 2 faction system fails and why it fails.
1. Balance - Two factions can NEVER be balanced, it seems. One side will always seem to dominate another side. People generally don't want to be on the failboat, and will always somehow try to be on the winning side, ie Order dominating Destruction on some servers and vice versa in WAR (in essence, let me log on to my Order toon and ride the zerg). A model like DAOC just works better.
2. Exploitation - Here's where your ideas may fail. Even when implementing safeguards, someone, some way, some how, finds an exploit. Create any conditions you like, players find an exploit. The more you leave up to "creating a balance via a developer idea" and less of "make balance via a competitive 3 or more factions", players will exploit that. Just look at WAR. Its easier to exploit an underdog system, OP classes and overbalanced / underbalanced factions to get gear.
3. Developer Execution - But here's where those ideas will MOST likely fail. Let's say they have your ideas in place. What are it's percentage limits, aka "At what point do the Eldar switch over? Why are the Eldar switching over? Is it "lore factual?". How many times will this happen during a server day? Will a seperate dev team be able to watch over the servers and make this happen? Will it be done all the time, a week by week basis, month by month basis, etc. Is it done by current population real time? Is it done by whom is pushing their will more? Or is it because too many people are logging, hence creating a feel that one "realm" is underpowered? Long story short, how do the dev's sort through that and come to terms with it, and ultimately act on it?
All in all, they are great ideas and may be a ton of fun if implemented correctly. However, it leaves many questions and too much to chance. A three faction or multiple race system would easily iradicate imbalance and create an interesting dynamic. This is what most players would like to see.