Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Rift's Conquest vs. GW2's WvW
Xssiv
Member UncommonPosts: 359
After experiencing Rift's Conquest system last night, I really don't think it compares to GW2's WvW. Clearly they share some similarities but in my opinion, GW2's WvW offers much more in terms of depth and strategic gameplay.
Conquest felt like a 30 minute zerg fest with some PvE style objectives along the way, mainly through capturing control points and extractors by standing by them or DPS'ing enemy ones down.
What seems like a shortfall for the system is the fact that whichever faction has the most organized zerg will win and there's not a heck of a lot you can do about it since the matches end so quickly.
While I don't have a tremendous amount of experience with GW2's WvW system, it definitely feels more like a thinking-man's battle. I'm sure zerging will be effective in short bursts but overall it will be the server with the most perserverance and strategy that wins out in the end.
Overall, I like the Conquest system and think it provides some decent PvP enjoyment but I definitely think that WvW will offer a superior gaming experience over the long term.
Comments
Thats interesting. I also heard a few people refer to the conquest as a zerg. But the real question is: is it fun?
Sounds like just a minor difference from Port Scion
Not really. It's more about running around capping points and avoiding pvp untill you have the bigger zerg on your side. It's honestly pretty boring in comparison to other pvp meta's available.
It's true there is zerging in GW2 WvW but thats at the start you try to quickly gain land. But after thats done it's not very effective now you have to plan out what to take over that will weaken the other factions the most such as cutting off there supplies.
Well you can't comparet the 2: WvWvW is more deep and complex.
It's siege warfare after all. With supplies too!
Let's be honest Rift Conquest mode was made in a hurry to have some kind of 3 faction pvp battleground to oppose to WvWvW but ... it's not really as well designed and refined.
Conquest = a fun battleground/warfront
Thats all it is. Its not open world, its not persistent. Its nothng like GW2 or DAoC. Its been advertised to draw fans of those games obviously (and probably the only reason it was added), but its far from DAoC.
It is fun, but if you dislike the battleground concept you will dislike conquest.
I would agree on the first part. WvW is far more deeper in design. they dont even compare.
Conquest is basically Rift's attempt at WoW's PvP zone concept but with Threee Factions instead of two.
it fails because the WoW PvP zones lost their spice with the cooldowns just like in Rift.
also although its a zerg-fest like WvW in GW2, it still doesnt offer interesting enough gameplay to make up for it.
the battles are short,
their are no interesting mechanics to gameplay to keep things interesting outside of character vs character fights. (even WoW has sieges weapons to keep things interesting)
atm, I would perfer Lake Wintergrasp from WoTLK beta over conquest.
hopefully this is a placeholder. Hope more of you Rift players voice this concern on the OFFICAL FORUM so we can see change made.
Philosophy of MMO Game Design
Theres a pretty long thread on the official forum, of course Tion moved it to the PvP forum that nobody goes to.
Overall 1.9 has met a pretty bad response, but it also had technical issues (IAs not working) that are uncommon to Trion. But people are not happy about the cooldown and are voicing their opinions. It will be changed Im sure.
rift will never have fun PVP
its macro heavy combat system sees to that.
oh lol its not persitent its like wintergrasp. Its basicly a copy of wow but with the 3 sever idea from GW2. oh dear.
I think I stick with TSW for PVP until GW2 / PS2. at least its not on a frikin timer.