Don't you see? ESO player capacity pr map is 5-6 time larger then GW2.
So instead of 1x600+ player zerg you would have 5-6x 100+ player Zergs in ESO which equals to Biggest GW2 Zerg.
So in the end it's going to be Zerg Wars in ESO only on a much larger scale then in GW2.
If you really believe Zergs won't dominate ESO? - you are walking in to the largest Trap of your MMO expereince.
The biggest complaint people have about Zergs is the imbalance. So why do numbers even matter when there will clearly be more numbers on each of the three sides? If anything, supporting larger numbers is PREFERRED since the battles will be more epic than your typical throwaway MMO that has a bunch of smaller instances. It puts the MMO back in mmorpg. It basically comes down to this philosophical question: Would you rather have a Tennis Match (your typical MMO) or an epic War (daoc, eso, and in the future CU)?
The problem with epic Wars - is coverage. When max capacity is 600 players pr side, it's harder to get replacement for different Timezones ( NA, EU, Oceanic - assuming Cyrodiil is 24/7 Instance). So you can end up with one side having perfect 24/7 coeverage ( that's what people would try to do) and other sides suffering heavy lack of players. ( like 400 vs 200 vs 50 )
ESO will suffer heavily from it. Mark my words. It was a problem in GW2 - it will be an even bigger problem in ESO.
Originally posted by Azzras
So if one team is equal number to the other team (which is what the system is supposed to be designed to accomplish. tbd if it actually works), then what's the problem? Your 'zerg' defends against their 'zerg'. Your 'zergs' split up to 'zerg' other 'zergs'.
(in b4 grammar police learn you misspelled a word. oh the horror!)
It's not so easy to man 600 players - since Cyrodill is also a mix of PvE and PvP ( which is imho a really bad idea ), a lot of players will not take part in your Sieges Warfare. So we are looking at great disbalance in the forces for each side.
Join another zone or whatever it's called?
Most every thing you're saying is TBD. I respect your opinion, but you're kind of coming off like everything you say is fact and already set in stone.
Maybe it will be zerg fest, one side only scenario. Maybe there's some system in place to prevent it. Maybe we just don't know yet.
It's cool to speculate, but that's all any of this is...speculation. Agree?
Most every thing you're saying is TBD. I respect your opinion, but you're kind of coming off like everything you say is fact and already set in stone.
Maybe it will be zerg fest, one side only scenario. Maybe there's some system in place to prevent it. Maybe we just don't know yet.
It's cool to speculate, but that's all any of this is...speculation. Agree?
You beat me to the punch. Most of what this guy is bitching about hasn't even been set in stone. Also, from what I've heard, there's supposed to be a different Megaserver in each part of the world (ie, one in North America, a separate one in Europe, etc.).
You gotta love these "exactly even stevens!" Nazis. Not only is war and real life not like that, but you're basically sanitizing the hell out of PvP when you get into the bean counting of every side being EXACTLY the same number. Having exact even numbers on all sides is basically the definition of a SPORT. I'd much rather have the unpredictability of various sizes and skill levels than domesticating the thing and making sure everybody is equal number and skill. If you're outnumbered, don't cry about it. Learn to deal with it and out think the less skilled and/or organized bigger enemy. If you get rolled, don't cry about it. Realize that it's all part of the game and look forward to the day when you can get your sweet revenge.
in ESO its about a big war, did you ever saw a BIG war beetween 8 people?
Exactly, the entire point of RVR is to have huge battles.
Yes zergs will be powerful and ninja-capping in the middle of the night will be annoying, but who cares. Unpredictability is all part of the fun and believe it or not some people like being the underdogs.
One of the main thing people complain about in Planetside 2 is a lack of endgame objective, and in GW2 people don't like the small maps and rapid rezzing. ESO is adresing these two problems which is very promising.
A lot of people just want to hate on the game, and I admit I was there for quite a while. But with this new information I really do thing Zenimax is trying to do RvR right. MikeB's article really does explain things very well.
Originally posted by cochs I thnk overall they got more right then GW2 did, but that's just natural because they had GW2 to learn from also.
I'd beg to differ a bit.
GW2 had DAoC to learn from, and evidently they did not pick up the lessons of DAoC, in fact what they did looks like an attempt to improve on it, and they never got there.
Since the team at ESO had experience doing DAoC, they could go back to a formula that they knew worked pretty well. I think there is far more DAoC here than any "learing" from GW2.
for me, i think ESO will feel more like an open pvp experience than GW2 does. the size of the area is much bigger and there is pve objectives just like a pve area.
i also have to feel like i am progressing and getting stronger, that was the game breaker for me in GW2.
i did enjoy the combat for the most part but that is only fun for so long, i need substance and i need to feel like i am progressing my character.
I haven't played ESO - it looks good. I do think just having healers will give a bigger boost to organized teams which will be nice. So it has promise.
OTOH - most of what is said about GW2 WvW stuff is flat out wrong. Its closer to the truth to say that zergs never win then saying they always win.
Why? Zergs can win every single battle but lose the war. The maps in GW2 are too big for one zerg to hold. If you try that strategy the enemy just splits up and caps all kinds of stuff and your side loses in the long run. Waypoints aren't going to save you - they get contested. If you want to criticize GW2 - its major flaw is the scoring system and the fact that it never really ends. That's my gripe.
The zerg stuff is way overblow. The lousy servers get some kinda ego boost with their zergs but always get their butts handed to them on the scoreboard.
- 2-weeks timed matches between servers that reset your enemy and the map.
- No context or lore-based conflict.
- 4 small sectioned zones.
- No end-game goal or dynamic win situation beyond beyond point at the end of the match.
- Player culling, where players disappear if there are too many on screen.
- No guild ownership.
ESO
- 3-month long matches that only reset leaderboards and points, not enemy nor map.
- Deep lore-based conflict with clearly defined alliances, governments and motives.
- One large seamless zone.
- End-game goal of capturing central keeps and crowning emperor not tied to match length.
- No player culling.
- Guild-based keep holdings.
Yep. ESO is far more similar to DaoC than it is to GW2. The people who say it looks like GW2 PvP are obviously only looking surface deep and have never played DaoC. While I haven't had the chance to fully experience ESO pvp, it seems to trump GW2 on every single bullet point of what makes a superior RvR.
- 2-weeks timed matches between servers that reset your enemy and the map. Yes...resetting the enemy so that you are matched more appropriately is bad?
- No context or lore-based conflict. Mostly true, though again, the new map is a direct consequence of the living story.
- 4 small sectioned zones. They added a 5th, infinitely regenerated map with no overflow (no more reason that you can't be fighting)
- No end-game goal or dynamic win situation beyond beyond point at the end of the match. Servers receive bonuses based on their performance...players are also able progress through WvW ranks to improve effectiveness in WvW. WvW seasons also provide server wide benefits at the end of a 7 week period. (edit)
- Player culling, where players disappear if there are too many on screen. There hasn't been culling in almost a year
- No guild ownership. Guilds can own keeps and strongholds
ESO
- 3-month long matches that only reset leaderboards and points, not enemy nor map. This is the only thing that bothers me about AvA in ESO...
- Deep lore-based conflict with clearly defined alliances, governments and motives.
- One large seamless zone.
- End-game goal of capturing central keeps and crowning emperor not tied to match length.
- No player culling.
- Guild-based keep holdings.
Just making some corrections...carry on with the criticisms of GW2
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
GW2 essentially has ZERO consequences when it comes to dying. Literally every player can rezz and every player can instantly pop back into battle.. no fuss, no muss.
Nice amount of misinformation to start the post. You die, you respawn far away from action, with a loooong run back and also some repair bills to your equipment.
2) GW2 is basically just a tournament, while ESO is more of a full scale war. In GW2, you have small, rotating instances and all pvp progress gets wiped after a small interval of time. It's basically an E-Sport (GW2) vs. a War (ESO) experience. I don't know about you, but e-sports are boring to me and they break immersion.
ESO is just the latest "new kid on the blocks". ESO's PvP in a zone is no different from GW2's PvP in a zone, people see the new "DAOC messiah" in every new game with PvP, and we all know how it ends.
3) GW2 is way too damn laggy, whereas I hear that ESO is far more performant with hundreds of players on the screen. I seriously doubt that GW2 will ever change since they took the WRONG PATH of the F2P model. There's no incentive to invest huge amounts of money to improve performance like there would be with a subscription model.
Can't say anything about ESO because of the NDA, sadly, but GW2 is way more performant for large scale battles than any other MMORPG with similar graphic quality.
Definitely looking forward to the RvR in ESO. It was built by former DaoC developers, and these guys know PvP unlike pretty much every other MMO in the market.
I'm going to enjoy April just reading this board. The return to reality will be very harsh. It's going to be fun to read all the "RvR is just a zerg!" posts here. What goes around comes around.
What JL Picard said basically. I actually enjoyed both GW2 RvR and ESO RvR, but one of the two stood the test of time already... The other one still has to prove itself.
Here are my concerns:
- The bigger map in ESO could be both a blessing and a curse (could mean: less fights, keeps more difficult to defend, taking keeps easier)
- ESO realism at the cost of gaming experience/pleasure (how flexible will they be?)
- ESO has less secondary objectives and less variety on the RvR map than GW2 (might bore small groups/solo players)
- ESO classes are less balanced individually and some don't stand a chance out of a group (the healer on their own will suffer against a nightblade dps)
Once the shininess and amazement of the first week of ESO disappears, people will start looking clinically for class balance, numbers, best builds, frequent fights and biggest ROI strategy for victory.
ESO still RvR still has to "consolidate" before we can even say it is a good game RvR wise. What people will make of it is the most important thing.
PS: Half of the people criticizing GW2 clearly haven't played it for more than 10 minutes of RvR... Fine, but don't bring "your experience" about the game please
Please dont compare ESO to GW2. I bought and played GW2 only for the WvW, but that was a real letdown to me as an old daoc junkie. Therefore i never got a max lvl char in Gw2 because of the lackluster Pve and the bad PvP. Always compare something to the best. Compare it to Daoc.
Well ESOs praise now in the pvp were there are no zerg and everything i so skillfull what will happened when the game is released and millions logon to pvp? Big BIG Zerg all over again and wouldn't it?. Do you really think that when a group is goin for a keep and encounters a strong defense and screaming out for help that no one will come because there are no zerg in ESO?
I would come instantly like I did in Warhammer online, like I do in GW2.
I am not being critical against ESO cause I loved Warhammer online PVP and I enjoy WvW in GW2 aswell and I think that the pvp looks awesome and I am sure it will be a great success.
I am being critical against the hype, ppl screaming out how good the pvp is after 10 hours of gameplay, saying stuff about the depth of everything. No matter the depths of the game players always beat the game and come up with solutions that developers didn't count on, maybe big zerges will come maybe something else? who knows, but things will change alot from beta and a year after release.
I hope it is as good as you all want it to be hell I even hope it will be better then you hope for.
I wish I could be there for you but in my family we are 5 hardcore gamers living together so a sub game can never be worth it in this family
I wish you all the luck just don't hype yourselves up to much and get disapointed.
Guys, slow down. Game isn't even released yet. Only time will tell, if it's better than GW2.
I've played GW2 for almost 2500hours and simply got tired of it. If ESO will last at least for 1 year for me, I'm ok with that.
I managed only to play maybe 5h in Cyrodiil during last beta weekend (and 25-30h in pve), and for me it was like an improved version of GW2 WvW. Everything felt tad better, polished.
Gameplay was smooth and I did not notice any skill lag nor fps drops (but I've heard that lots of people had those issues).
Things I liked most:
- massive use of siege machines (in ESO there were dozens, in GW2 things are being done usually with 1-2 catas/rams)
- what's destoryed, stays destroyed (in ESO if you take the keep you have to rebuild walls, in GW2 it's automatically reset)
- specific skill lines created solely for RvR
- one huge zone to play in
- taking keeps takes long enough to organize some defense
- daily quests
- art style (hard to describe this really - ESO just looks serious (take a look at those trebs, ballistas, genuine Roman craft;-) while GW2 is much more cartoony with all those colors and shiny skills, but it's a matter of personal preference of course)
GW2 is a great game, but ESO has made a small step forward. If it's worth paying 15$/month - that's up to you.
I am interested in ESO's AvA and will likely try it out some time, however I think it is way too early to hype up ESO's AvA since many of the problems associated with RvR won't show up until a large amount of people have played it for a while. For me there are three major concerns about ESO for once it is launched.
1. The lack of objectives that players can assault at same time before they move on to next. At any given time, each faction only has about 4 keeps they can attack. Combined with the huge amount of people (666 per side), that sounds like epic zerging and no room for medium size group to be meaningfully useful unless they want to compete with small teams for small objectives like lumber mills etc.
2. The mega server combined with instanced champions may reduce the sense of community feeling. Despite its lack of lore support, GW2's WvW actually does creates a sense of server pride that is shared between WvW and PvX population on the same server. I am curious about the impact of those instanced champions on general population's caring level in ESO. If the penalty for switching champions is relatively minor, it will really destroy the sense of community for a lot of people.
3. The large AvA map size and relatively slow combat mechanisms may make things feel very slow after playing a while. As much as I love roaming in a big world, I do tend to get bored if I run a long time without anything interesting happen. Running for 5 min is fine if you know there is a good chance you will get some unexpected fight some where, however if you know most of the time nothing will happen it just gets old fast. Of course we will have to wait and see how this pans out.
There are some minor concerns like the siege spam etc, but I do like that ESO has a winning condition that can be achieved by every side at any given time. I feel time zone coverage will play less a role in ESO since the faction without SEA/EU coverage can still "win" if the do well in NA time. But again RvR is a very complex game mode and we won't really know how some mechanisms will work out until it has been played extensively by players.
1. what ever happened to servers just duking it out internally? Why do i need to switch fights every X-weeks/months with a server just cuz they are over weighted. I don't mind it. bring it. don't swap it out.
2. player culling in gw 2 lasted MONTHS and MONTHS. they should have fixed it at the start but they kept it around for months and months. yes its been fixed for a while now, but who gives a crap they should have fixed it from the start but they didnt. it took them MONTHS and MONTHS to fix it. i don't know what dbag executive thought player culling was awesome and kept it around for so long but they fired him too late and fixed it too late. fix this crap early and make faster changes instead of waiting 6+ months to a YEAR TO fix crap no one clearly likes.
you can make up a million reasons why they kept is around so long, but doesn't matter. it was a bogus idea that got removed too late. case closed. can they be more slow about fixing key pvp problems in GW2?
IMPORTANT: Please keep all replies to my posts about GAMING. Please no negative or backhanded comments directed at me personally. If you are going to post a reply that includes how you feel about me, please don't bother replying & just ignore my post instead. I'm on this forum to talk about GAMING. Thank you.
1. what ever happened to servers just duking it out internally? Why do i need to switch fights every X-weeks/months with a server just cuz they are over weighted. I don't mind it. bring it. don't swap it out.
2. player culling in gw 2 lasted MONTHS and MONTHS. they should have fixed it at the start but they kept it around for months and months. yes its been fixed for a while now, but who gives a crap they should have fixed it from the start but they didnt. it took them MONTHS and MONTHS to fix it. i don't know what dbag executive thought player culling was awesome and kept it around for so long but they fired him too late and fixed it too late. fix this crap early and make faster changes instead of waiting 6+ months to a YEAR TO fix crap no one clearly likes.
you can make up a million reasons why they kept is around so long, but doesn't matter. it was a bogus idea that got removed too late. case closed. can they be more slow about fixing key pvp problems in GW2?
1. Sounds like you are a tough guy, but a lot of people are not. The participation rate in a server's WvW dropped dramatically once it started to lose big. It happened several times already when a server is stuck in a loosing match for too long (like 1-2 months), people are that server are willing to pay to transfer out.
2. It is actually fixed in 4 month since game launched. You can argue it takes too long, but it is a complicated problem that took time to sort it out. Case maybe closed to you, but not to hundreds of thousands who still play GW2.
players move to winning side if pvp (or zerg) not equal.
seen tis GW2.
will see...
Aye, pretty much my point in my previous post.
Losing for a week or two and then being matched to more appropriate enemies is ok.
Losing for three months, and NOT being matched against more appropriate enemies so actually losing more and more, that's not fun.
And in all those multi-faction PvP games, you always have a stronger faction on the top of the food chain.
ESO will have serious faction balance problems when more players will flock to the winning side (or what will be perceived as the winning side), and the removal of racial restrictions will make this a no brainer, since people wanting to play (e.g.) a Nord will be able to do it in any faction anyway. So no racial pride, no faction pride, just join the winner and rake in the rewards.
Comments
Join another zone or whatever it's called?
Most every thing you're saying is TBD. I respect your opinion, but you're kind of coming off like everything you say is fact and already set in stone.
Maybe it will be zerg fest, one side only scenario. Maybe there's some system in place to prevent it. Maybe we just don't know yet.
It's cool to speculate, but that's all any of this is...speculation. Agree?
You beat me to the punch. Most of what this guy is bitching about hasn't even been set in stone. Also, from what I've heard, there's supposed to be a different Megaserver in each part of the world (ie, one in North America, a separate one in Europe, etc.).
You gotta love these "exactly even stevens!" Nazis. Not only is war and real life not like that, but you're basically sanitizing the hell out of PvP when you get into the bean counting of every side being EXACTLY the same number. Having exact even numbers on all sides is basically the definition of a SPORT. I'd much rather have the unpredictability of various sizes and skill levels than domesticating the thing and making sure everybody is equal number and skill. If you're outnumbered, don't cry about it. Learn to deal with it and out think the less skilled and/or organized bigger enemy. If you get rolled, don't cry about it. Realize that it's all part of the game and look forward to the day when you can get your sweet revenge.
whats with all the "zerg is shit" stuff?
in ESO its about a big war, did you ever saw a BIG war beetween 8 people?
Blame it on starcraft....
Exactly, the entire point of RVR is to have huge battles.
Yes zergs will be powerful and ninja-capping in the middle of the night will be annoying, but who cares. Unpredictability is all part of the fun and believe it or not some people like being the underdogs.
One of the main thing people complain about in Planetside 2 is a lack of endgame objective, and in GW2 people don't like the small maps and rapid rezzing. ESO is adresing these two problems which is very promising.
A lot of people just want to hate on the game, and I admit I was there for quite a while. But with this new information I really do thing Zenimax is trying to do RvR right. MikeB's article really does explain things very well.
I'd beg to differ a bit.
GW2 had DAoC to learn from, and evidently they did not pick up the lessons of DAoC, in fact what they did looks like an attempt to improve on it, and they never got there.
Since the team at ESO had experience doing DAoC, they could go back to a formula that they knew worked pretty well. I think there is far more DAoC here than any "learing" from GW2.
for me, i think ESO will feel more like an open pvp experience than GW2 does. the size of the area is much bigger and there is pve objectives just like a pve area.
i also have to feel like i am progressing and getting stronger, that was the game breaker for me in GW2.
i did enjoy the combat for the most part but that is only fun for so long, i need substance and i need to feel like i am progressing my character.
All other criticism of the game aside, ESO's PvP mechanics and engine performance seems leaps and bounds beyond GW2.
I haven't played ESO - it looks good. I do think just having healers will give a bigger boost to organized teams which will be nice. So it has promise.
OTOH - most of what is said about GW2 WvW stuff is flat out wrong. Its closer to the truth to say that zergs never win then saying they always win.
Why? Zergs can win every single battle but lose the war. The maps in GW2 are too big for one zerg to hold. If you try that strategy the enemy just splits up and caps all kinds of stuff and your side loses in the long run. Waypoints aren't going to save you - they get contested. If you want to criticize GW2 - its major flaw is the scoring system and the fact that it never really ends. That's my gripe.
The zerg stuff is way overblow. The lousy servers get some kinda ego boost with their zergs but always get their butts handed to them on the scoreboard.
GW2
- 2-weeks timed matches between servers that reset your enemy and the map.
- No context or lore-based conflict.
- 4 small sectioned zones.
- No end-game goal or dynamic win situation beyond beyond point at the end of the match.
- Player culling, where players disappear if there are too many on screen.
- No guild ownership.
ESO
- 3-month long matches that only reset leaderboards and points, not enemy nor map.
- Deep lore-based conflict with clearly defined alliances, governments and motives.
- One large seamless zone.
- End-game goal of capturing central keeps and crowning emperor not tied to match length.
- No player culling.
- Guild-based keep holdings.
^
This man. Give him a medal.
Yep. ESO is far more similar to DaoC than it is to GW2. The people who say it looks like GW2 PvP are obviously only looking surface deep and have never played DaoC. While I haven't had the chance to fully experience ESO pvp, it seems to trump GW2 on every single bullet point of what makes a superior RvR.
Just making some corrections...carry on with the criticisms of GW2
"As you read these words, a release is seven days or less away or has just happened within the last seven days those are now the only two states youll find the world of Tyria."...Guild Wars 2
What JL Picard said basically. I actually enjoyed both GW2 RvR and ESO RvR, but one of the two stood the test of time already... The other one still has to prove itself.
Here are my concerns:
- The bigger map in ESO could be both a blessing and a curse (could mean: less fights, keeps more difficult to defend, taking keeps easier)
- ESO realism at the cost of gaming experience/pleasure (how flexible will they be?)
- ESO has less secondary objectives and less variety on the RvR map than GW2 (might bore small groups/solo players)
- ESO classes are less balanced individually and some don't stand a chance out of a group (the healer on their own will suffer against a nightblade dps)
Once the shininess and amazement of the first week of ESO disappears, people will start looking clinically for class balance, numbers, best builds, frequent fights and biggest ROI strategy for victory.
ESO still RvR still has to "consolidate" before we can even say it is a good game RvR wise. What people will make of it is the most important thing.
PS: Half of the people criticizing GW2 clearly haven't played it for more than 10 minutes of RvR... Fine, but don't bring "your experience" about the game please
Hodor!
Well ESOs praise now in the pvp were there are no zerg and everything i so skillfull what will happened when the game is released and millions logon to pvp? Big BIG Zerg all over again and wouldn't it?. Do you really think that when a group is goin for a keep and encounters a strong defense and screaming out for help that no one will come because there are no zerg in ESO?
I would come instantly like I did in Warhammer online, like I do in GW2.
I am not being critical against ESO cause I loved Warhammer online PVP and I enjoy WvW in GW2 aswell and I think that the pvp looks awesome and I am sure it will be a great success.
I am being critical against the hype, ppl screaming out how good the pvp is after 10 hours of gameplay, saying stuff about the depth of everything. No matter the depths of the game players always beat the game and come up with solutions that developers didn't count on, maybe big zerges will come maybe something else? who knows, but things will change alot from beta and a year after release.
I hope it is as good as you all want it to be hell I even hope it will be better then you hope for.
I wish I could be there for you but in my family we are 5 hardcore gamers living together so a sub game can never be worth it in this family
I wish you all the luck just don't hype yourselves up to much and get disapointed.
// Beelze
Guys, slow down. Game isn't even released yet. Only time will tell, if it's better than GW2.
I've played GW2 for almost 2500hours and simply got tired of it. If ESO will last at least for 1 year for me, I'm ok with that.
I managed only to play maybe 5h in Cyrodiil during last beta weekend (and 25-30h in pve), and for me it was like an improved version of GW2 WvW. Everything felt tad better, polished.
Gameplay was smooth and I did not notice any skill lag nor fps drops (but I've heard that lots of people had those issues).
Things I liked most:
- massive use of siege machines (in ESO there were dozens, in GW2 things are being done usually with 1-2 catas/rams)
- what's destoryed, stays destroyed (in ESO if you take the keep you have to rebuild walls, in GW2 it's automatically reset)
- specific skill lines created solely for RvR
- one huge zone to play in
- taking keeps takes long enough to organize some defense
- daily quests
- art style (hard to describe this really - ESO just looks serious (take a look at those trebs, ballistas, genuine Roman craft;-) while GW2 is much more cartoony with all those colors and shiny skills, but it's a matter of personal preference of course)
GW2 is a great game, but ESO has made a small step forward. If it's worth paying 15$/month - that's up to you.
For me totally worth it.
I am interested in ESO's AvA and will likely try it out some time, however I think it is way too early to hype up ESO's AvA since many of the problems associated with RvR won't show up until a large amount of people have played it for a while. For me there are three major concerns about ESO for once it is launched.
1. The lack of objectives that players can assault at same time before they move on to next. At any given time, each faction only has about 4 keeps they can attack. Combined with the huge amount of people (666 per side), that sounds like epic zerging and no room for medium size group to be meaningfully useful unless they want to compete with small teams for small objectives like lumber mills etc.
2. The mega server combined with instanced champions may reduce the sense of community feeling. Despite its lack of lore support, GW2's WvW actually does creates a sense of server pride that is shared between WvW and PvX population on the same server. I am curious about the impact of those instanced champions on general population's caring level in ESO. If the penalty for switching champions is relatively minor, it will really destroy the sense of community for a lot of people.
3. The large AvA map size and relatively slow combat mechanisms may make things feel very slow after playing a while. As much as I love roaming in a big world, I do tend to get bored if I run a long time without anything interesting happen. Running for 5 min is fine if you know there is a good chance you will get some unexpected fight some where, however if you know most of the time nothing will happen it just gets old fast. Of course we will have to wait and see how this pans out.
There are some minor concerns like the siege spam etc, but I do like that ESO has a winning condition that can be achieved by every side at any given time. I feel time zone coverage will play less a role in ESO since the faction without SEA/EU coverage can still "win" if the do well in NA time. But again RvR is a very complex game mode and we won't really know how some mechanisms will work out until it has been played extensively by players.
pvp is always fun if u win .
players move to winning side if pvp (or zerg) not equal.
seen tis GW2.
will see...
so now with http://elderscrollsonline.com/en/news/post/2014/02/14/the-beta-nda-has-lifted
what do you guys think?
1. what ever happened to servers just duking it out internally? Why do i need to switch fights every X-weeks/months with a server just cuz they are over weighted. I don't mind it. bring it. don't swap it out.
2. player culling in gw 2 lasted MONTHS and MONTHS. they should have fixed it at the start but they kept it around for months and months. yes its been fixed for a while now, but who gives a crap they should have fixed it from the start but they didnt. it took them MONTHS and MONTHS to fix it. i don't know what dbag executive thought player culling was awesome and kept it around for so long but they fired him too late and fixed it too late. fix this crap early and make faster changes instead of waiting 6+ months to a YEAR TO fix crap no one clearly likes.
you can make up a million reasons why they kept is around so long, but doesn't matter. it was a bogus idea that got removed too late. case closed. can they be more slow about fixing key pvp problems in GW2?
1. Sounds like you are a tough guy, but a lot of people are not. The participation rate in a server's WvW dropped dramatically once it started to lose big. It happened several times already when a server is stuck in a loosing match for too long (like 1-2 months), people are that server are willing to pay to transfer out.
2. It is actually fixed in 4 month since game launched. You can argue it takes too long, but it is a complicated problem that took time to sort it out. Case maybe closed to you, but not to hundreds of thousands who still play GW2.
+1