f13.net

Link, and poll. (http://vnboards.ign.com/warhammer_online_age_of_reckoning_general_board/b22997/108947743/p1/?608)

---

Not sure why this is the first option. Scenarios are fun. No one can argue this. But removal? Decreasing? Com on......

EDIT: Fixed link.

I could understand voting for no scenarios if open rvr was on daoc scale.

But with WAR weaksauce keeps, I'm not convinced it would be wise.

Limited Scenarios.

3-2-1-1.

But it doesn't matter if most of the scenarios fucking suck. Right now there isn't a tier 3 or 4 one I could pick as that "one." But I haven't played Caledor Woods yet for Tier 4.

Sigh. Someone punch Mark on the gob.

I really dont understand why they didnt make the scenarios more like DAOC mini-RVR BGs.

I'm hoping they release this server, just so we can watch it crash and burn. Maybe that would shut up the people whining about scenarios. The scenarios are the only decent part of the game. People aren't ignoring the orvr because scenarios exist. They're ignoring the orvr because the orvr fucking sucks.

This is the WRONG way to look at the problem. The same that shattered DAoC with multiple servers because they were too scared to address the problems.

I'm completely against instanced PvP, yet I wouldn't remove Scenarios from Warhammer.

The key is to have all four parts always accessible and rewarding equally: Quests, PQs, Scenarios and Open RvR.

Players need to access all four. Right now it's just Scenarios. Removing scenarios right now would lead to an HORRIBLY GRINDY experience. Way beyond your worst nightmares.

Is it to hard to keep them like they are, but make Open RvR more attractive, and a better path? I like scenarios due to my limited playtime, good quick action. Removal would have been my last option.

Open field RVR in teir 1 is fun a couple people can go out and cause some havok and take some nodes. Once you hit tier 2 you pretty much need a full group to do anything. So if you don't have a full  group you don' t go to cap nodes. If you don't have a full group you don't go to rvr either because you will either find nobody to fight or you will find a full group out node capping and they will curb stomp you.

The whole way Open RVR is setup there is nothing to keep a single person out there and full groups typically do ninja strikes they go in cap a node get their renown and leave. There is no reason to linger and typically reasons NOT to linger. Also for keep raids there are reasons to attack a keep but in the tier 2 and tier 3 areas I cannot see a great deal reason to bother with defending a keep. Most people seem to let the keep get capped and then go back and retake it later. You rarely see more than one or two people around and one or two people vs a warband has perdictable results.

I note that so far the poll is overwhelmingly leaning towards "No more server types" by 63%. Which is what I voted for. A new server type won't unfuck the problem.

The problem is scenarios are easier to join and give massive rewards in comparison to everything else in the game. Questing, PQ's, and Open RVR all take longer to get to, have less rewards/time played and/or require a group.

Add massive XP and renown to all open RVR areas, and provide a quick teleport to the nearest warcamp when shit really starts to kick off. Anything else is just pissing in the wind.

Am I the only person that sees the irony of people wanting a teleport to warcamps where active fighting is going on?

Probably. Would you like to explain the irony or just pat yourself on the back?  :why_so_serious:

Yes, it does rely on at least one side making an active attempt to attack, and at that point, if you would be arsed to go and start a fight yourself, you wouldn't need the teleport.

That really does nothing to help the solo guy who can't do a fucking thing in Open RVR unless there is already something going on and people there to help his side. People who can and do organize in groups will, but without giving defenders an easy way to get to the action, it's a lot easier to just not be bothered with the 15 minute walk to get gangfucked by an organized group.

He may be referring to ,thats basically what a scenario is. True, but i think HaemishM's idea is a good one that would also go well with more "Carrot" for ORvR.

Well yeah... if part of the reason the scenarios are so popular is the mechanic that lets you get there without any trouble jiffy-quick and automatically puts you in a group, then applying that convenience to Open RVR would certainly help. Hell, I'd even go so far as to say let warbands open themselves up to people (in the same manner as the open parties mechanic) and give the members a "Teleport to warcamp nearest the warband" option.

The only reason I can think of not to do this is some outdated idea that a "world" without travel time sinks isn't a world at all. Of course, that argument gets a punch in the dick from scnearios anyway.

Use catapults, like the greenskins  :why_so_serious:

Not really.

Right now I only play scenarios and sit idle at a warcamp. If there was RvR it would take me very little to join.

Problem is that I won't. It feels like time wasted. No progress at all. Even if there's RvR I won't go there because I know that an hour later my exp bar won't have moved one bit.

The problem is the reward, the rest are details.

I wouldn't mind scenarios if they would make the following changes:

1 - No more than 3 options at every tier. Anything beyond that is totally overkill because you are spreading things too thin.

2 - No scenarios that overwhelming reward scenario points for kills. Some points per kill are good. Things like "Murderball" are absolutely idiotic. The DPS classes love it because it's not real combat, it's just a clusterfuck in a bowl. Scenarios need actual objectives. They need to create objectives that remove the stupid one zerg mentality. Have 2+ objectives that must be simulataneously held/attacked/defended by one side, and all of a sudden you've introduced actual strategy into the game.

3 - XP gain shouldn't be based on kills. It should be based solely on team effort and completing objectives. Renown should be based on kills. Mixing up the two means that people just ignore objectives and play murderball.

4 - Increase XP gain on other things besides scenarios. Don't make them the ONLY option to level because your quest reward xp is in the toilet.

5 - From what I understand, people can drop groups in scenarios. That should not be allowed. You are on a team, and you need to get with the program.

When you are doing scenarious you can be out questing until one opens. In open rvr you can do nothing but run around an empty area until stuff happens. Whatever XP bonus they give does not make up for the fact that 90% of the time you are running in an empty woods with nothing to do. I like the idea of teleporting to the nearest warcamp if nodes are under attack but that could have nasty consequences to trying to take a keep.

Or they could just remove 90% of the NPCs around a keep and let players teleport directly to one that's under attack. That way you're actually fighting players instead of fighting cheating mobs that can fire through walls.

You should get periodical exp just for BEING in the rvr lakes, if people were sitting in the pvp areas instead of the warcamps while they waited for their scenario to pop at least SOME pvp would happen.

Or people (me included, considering the grind) would just park the character there and then go read a book.

That's a terrible idea. You reward activity, not the lack of it.

Give chest for defense.

make it a public quest, kill xx attackers then the doors respawn, and npc defenders pop to clear out any remaining attackers. then the keep goes into lockdown for an hour or something and a keep lord chest spawns. As it stands now once attackers break into the keep all you can do is stand on the floor with the keep lord and wait tell the door respawns, but even then by the time you force out the attackers they will have the outer doors almost down.

I'm not even going to vote in that poll, its as fucking stupid as the rule set for open RvR servers or the chicken rule on any server.


I don't know about that - I enjoy keep assaults and defense and trying to gain zone control. Its all quite fun until some Six Mouthbreathers start exploiting.

As for teleports, it would be cool to implement the blessed scroll of teleportation as implemented in the original Lineage game - let me store 'bookmark' locations when I visit somewhere, and use a scroll to teleport to a choice of location from my bookmark list. Create zones around keeps, objectives and serial content such as dungeons that cannot be bookmarked, and everything else is fair game.

Heck, just let me bind at war camps and store more than one bind point and I'd be happy.  As it is I usually just stay bound to the rally master closest to the war camp  and take a death teleport when I need to get back to a particular quest giver.  Although now that I have my gyro copter thing I do that less than I used to.

What a great idea to bring up such game-changing questions on their offical boards like this.

Really, the obvious way to do this would be a login poll, but not one that people click onto any answer asap to get it the fuck out of the way. One people have to choose to answer.

After you login, or after the EULA screen:
"We are polling our players to blah blah changes to the game. Would you like to participate? Please check the box: O Yes  O No"

No gets you into the game rightaway. Yes gets you the poll.

Fucking amateaur hour. The login poll idea, btw, took me like 10 seconds to pop into my head. Not a hard thought. Better to nest it on the fucking VN boards though, so only the players who care enough about the game to seek out each board will find it, and the casuals will never know.. (who needs their dollars, anyway?)


Right after I wrote this post, I went to the VN board tab to close it down, and noticed something funny. Look and see if you can find it too.

Why would you want to have official forums?

(http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg143/azazel_f13/WAR-WoW.jpg)

 :awesome_for_real:

29 days left of the poll and the same to WotLK? :-P Doooooooooooom!

Going afk in a pvp area, yeah that sounds like a good plan.  You'd be back at your warcamp in no time. 

Gamers are like electricity; the follow the path of least resistance.  Which in this case is scenarios.

Improve RvR lakes
1. You can teleport to any warcamp you've visited before.
2. Maybe have keeps under attack flash on the tier map to help folks find where the action is.
3. Rewards!  Let scenarios stay the fastest way to level, but make keep-taking better for gear.  And I don't mean the top 3 guys get green items either.  So you play scenarios to level but need to play lake RvR to get good gear.  Lake RvR gear should be the best in the game then PQ loot then Renown gear then world drops.

Or something like that.

Ya know, I never could figure out what happened to the idea of showing hotspots on maps so players can go to where the action is at. That's an old one and STILL a good one.

I also don't get the lack of teleporting in this game. If the world was maybe half the size as present, or we ran 3x as fast or something, maybe it'd begin to be palpable. But there's just too many things not working in harmony: too many separate PQs, too much distance between everything, too much distance for little/no reward RvR. The whole world is not going to change at this point, but they can patch in easier ways to cover it.

- Port stones to a Warcamp, easy.
- Perma boost to run speed: base 2x of present. Each tier adds another multipler. Horses double/triple that still. Easy.
- All the XP stuff for actively partaking in RvR. How hard is it to assess a) who's in an RvR area, b) who's dealing damage to an enemy players or healing, c) apply the diminishing-returns element to prevent two players grinding off in the distance; and, d) tie in the quests to provide the major XP boosts from turn-in at warcamp?
- Build an ingame polling system. Why do none of the old school studios ever do this first?

This really is feeling like 2004 again. I'd love to know why.

1.  Reduce the 60m hearthstone to a 60s one, problem solved if you bind in a chapter camp near a warcamp (highpass 12 for T3)

2.  As far as it feeling like 2004, yeah.  There's more people on the forums than actually playing the game, it seems.

> Build an ingame polling system. Why do none of the old school studios ever do this first?
Haha.  They have one already.  It was used extensively in beta.

Because devs from 2001 are making the game?

Fuck, you're right. I remember that now.  :uhrr:

Even better that he's polling randoms on the VN boards, who don't neccesarily even need a sub instead of his subscribers (hell, I voted, I don't have anything beyond a beta account yet).



You know, I didn't notice that. But it just adds to it. I was thinking of the huge WoW trial ad in the corner. I mean we all know about the 800lb gorilla, and it's mentioned in the other VN board forums up on top, but there's a fuckin' poster of that gorilla next to MJ's poll. Talk about an ever-present reminder of the other options if the WAR is not entirely to your liking...

 :grin:

Yep. There is one in WotLK beta as well. And was in EQ2. I meant why don't they do this in live games. Seems like a stupid-silly thing to just keep using since it's guaranteed focused quantitative feedback of your exact audience.

Random internet polling sucks for anything other than smacking the beehive of malcontents and never-going-to-play-anyways.

I say this every time vnboreds comes up, but it pisses me off to no end that MJ uses that right wing asshat-infested cess pool.  Throw this poll on the login screen.  Throw it on the Warhammer Alliance boards.  Throw it on the Hello Kitty Online forums.  Ask your Avon representative.  You will get more intelligent and accurate results from any of them than on that room temperature IQ board.

That said, the answer to me is diminishing returns.  2-3 scenarios a night?  Good.  More than that?  Hit ORvR if you want some xp and rp.

I now understand why you aren't enjoying this game. Not everyone wants to sit idle at a warcamp just in case someone from the other side wanders into RvR just to take a look-see.

The teleport is so players who might be interested in RvR don't have to wait outside a dead zone just in case. Let them do other things and use that rally book to teleport to the warcamp nearest to where RvR is happening.

*BOOM GOES THE DYNAMITE*

At least this wall of text is contained to an existing thread.

I try  :heart:

Fuck.  I'm tired of this.  Go somewhere else for the HEY MARK or grand fucking thesis of WAR posts.

Right because this isnt a discussion about scenarios in warhammer...i forgot my bad.  Hey lets talk about something else. 

If a cow laughed would milk come out of its nose?  Discuss.

But, but...If I say things in a long, drawn out format where I repeat myself a billion times and wax philosophically about "fun" I'm sure the devs will listen! Right? RIGHT?!?

Also having the maps set up like Planetside would help RvR..if you knew where the "hotspots" are ... the more likely you would be to find that hot spot and have some fun in RvR. 

I like this Terrorsauce guy.

Whoops, I like Rasix. Bye Terrorsauce!

This has theoretically been under consideration for a few months. Even with a world this big and lacking teleporting and horses before 20, it would go a long way to helping people justifying hauling their butts out there at all.

Cut down before he had a chance to blossom.

They had crossed swords on the map in daoc, seems logical that they'd highlight hotspots.  It was a nice way to know where the zerg was, though this information can also be used tactically by small strike forces. 

They're present in WAR aswell, atleast in a sense. Skirmish symbols appear, but unless you're popping the map all the time and zooming around all the pairings, you have no chance of noticing. They would need to be huge and on the world map or atleast pairing map. "Look, here be fightin', mon!"

Really, overall communication and information relaying in the game is abysmal. Personally I feel better global relaying of information would be an easy and extremely helpful way of shrinking the game world. Number of people in zones, in RvR lakes, at PQs, PQs beyond stage 1, people in queue for scenarios (so that queueing for a specific scenario has any point) and so on and so on.

Yeah these are in WAR too. The small red swords and shields indicate where battles where recently. It's somewhat helpful, as are the little explosion symbols on the keeps. The real issue is that there are too many RvR lake areas to monitor. If I happen to be in Empire vs. Chaos and there's fights in HE vs. DE I'd never know. Which has all been said before.

And even if I do happen to see these swords, I could be looking at a 5-10 minute hump just to get in a position to join in - like last night. I had to run a long way just to get into the RVR area when stuff was kicking off. I need a popup with the option to teleport to the nearest warcamp.

Yeah I was going to add that 90% of the time by the time you get on your horsie and get over to the fight it's gone. But the little icons are still there, leading to a "chase the puck" game. It's fine in Tier 1 where the areas are so small and close to the Warcamps, but they don't feel very epic consequently.

Ah, I did not know this. All the points are valid, but at least the foundation is there to be tweaked. Easy stuff now:

- Make it fade out over a period of time with some darker than others based on how recent activity is.
- Make it grow larger until it overlaps two local spawn points in something of a line or something
- Tweak other stuff
- All of the above

They do get larger based on how much RvR is going on. I've seen a few large ones clustered in T4 recently, and yeh there was action when I went there.

Yeah they do scale. They actually work ok, but you can't see them in other pairing zones which sucks, because it ends up playing like a 6 year old's soccer match. You know, a big pack of kids running around the field 5 steps behind the ball. And they need to fade faster.

Nice.

On the topic of scenarios, did anyone suggest taking out the queueing for individual ones, and just having a "queue" button, with the game then randomly selecting a scenario once enough people join up. And make it so that the same once can't be played twice in a row.

Yep. Pretty sure I saw that.  Pretty sure that also won't stop the next dev stalker from popping in here and telling us the same thing in 2000 words and a few charts.

I'd forgive a wall of text with supporting charts mixed in.

I still wouldn't read it mind you, but I'd be more forgiving.

It might be interesting to have some "battlefield objectives-light" in the Tier 1/2 RVR areas.  Something that is soloable but still worth something to the solo-ist (xp, whatever).

This would serve as training wheels for the tier 3 and 4 because if you get enough people doing these BO-light things they are sure to fight.......and there is your ORvR.  And you get the same ease of use/rush, etc. as with scenarios for nooblets.

Man, is it just me that's frustrated that MJ keeps harping on this? He asks, everyone says what a terrible idea it is, he sort of says, "Okay, but THINK about it..." and goes on about them again. Now a poll.

This does not instill me with confidence when the main, glaring problem (the grind) is so easy to fix. But no, no... don't cut xp needed. Make a new server set instead. Talk about swinging a sledgehammer in the opposite direction of the problem.

That sounds great, go do it somewhere else!

Man, there's newbs getting culled left and right. It's like fucking Nam around here.

Anyway, I just wanted to say, can we quit calling him MJ? It sounds gay as fuck.

F13... shit; I'm still only in F13... Every time I think I'm gonna wake up back at WHA. When I was home after my first tour, it was worse. I'd wake up and there'd be nothing. I hardly said a word to my wife, until I said "yes" to a divorce. When I was here, I wanted to be there; when I was there, all I could think of was getting back into that forum. I'm here a week now... waiting for a mission... getting softer; every minute I stay in this room, I get weaker, and every minute newbie squats in the bush, he gets stronger. Each time I looked around, the posts get a little longer.

I can second that motion and will never post it again. Unless we talk about Michael Jordan.

Hey, man, you don't talk to the Jacobs. You listen to him. The man's enlarged my mind. He's a poet-warrior in the classic sense. I mean sometimes he'll... uh... well, you'll say "hello" to him, right? And he'll just walk right by you. He won't even notice you. And suddenly he'll grab you, and he'll throw you in a corner, and he'll say, "do you know that 'if' is the middle word in life? If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you, if you can trust yourself when all men doubt you"... I mean I'm no, I can't... I'm a little man, I'm a little man, he's... he's a great man. I should have been a pair of ragged claws scuttling across floors of silent seas...

Every time i read MJ I think of spiderman

WAR is everywhere. C'est la vie...

Heh. Good that it has though, just wanted to make sure that some of the more reasonable suggestions were getting through.

Jacobs is more than willing to listen to any and all ideas, as long as they agree with his own.

I'm sorry, but this is a cheapshot.  I've had a number of exchanges with Mark over the years and always found him a willing listener.  When he didn't agree, it was usually backed by sound logic.

I realize that many of us would like WAR to be closer to our ideals, but lets not turn this into a personal attack on the man.  Like him or not, he has advanced the genre not only with his first, but second title.   

Boost world rvr rewards and kick people out of senarios for good at 40.

Yeah it stings, doesn't it?  I'm glad you've had a positive experience with Mark Jacobs but I'm not speaking for you.  I just calls them like I sees them.  In my experience from DAoC, he'd listen (when you could find him) yet despite all the feedback and suggestions, very little came of it.  It wasn't until DAoC started hemorrhaging subs and Jacobs stepped back to play with his Romans in Space that some significant changes on some long outstanding issues finally took place.  That's when the frontiers where redesigned (I left right before that and heard mixed things about how successful the redesign went), the no-TOA/no-buffbot server went in (sound familiar?) and leveling to 50 was made much easier.  With Jacobs at the helm, progress after the first few months was measured in baby steps.  Especially with regard to class balancing.  To this day, did they ever end up doing that comprehensive style review?  They didn't by the time I left.

Reading these threads here is vastly entertaining because it's like a flash back to 2002.  Quick, which game am I talking about?

"Oh, I can't believe the huge XP nerf at the end of beta!" 
"Oh, the grind sucks!"
"What's with the huge population imbalance?"
"Itemization sucks!"
"Crafting sucks!"
"There's no point to RvR!"

Déjà vu. The only difference this time is I haven't seen many class balance complaints, where that was a *huge* problem when DAoC was released.  I don't know if that's because the other problems have been higher profile or not, but I'll give Mythic the benefit of the doubt for now and give them credit for getting that part mostly right straight out of the box this time.  Everything I've heard is the PvP in WAR is very good and a lot of fun.  It's why they'll keep subs even though it sounds like the rest of the game has some serious flaws. 

Mark Jacobs can do a damn fine job with the early design of a game.  They're fun, but flawed.  The trick is getting him to move off of his original designs to fix the flaws.  I wish you every bit of luck with that.  If you can do it, WAR could end up as a well rounded game.  Personally, I wouldn't hold my breath.

ERROR: Data not found.

or

It's really too soon to tell. The welcome wore out on WAR's 'innovations' pretty quickly and it is a real question as to if Mythic can fix them.

I don't really have a history with Marky Mark, I played DAoC, but didn't last the trial month (due to the PVE grind, now that I think of it) but I do see shades of Nevermore's point with each post that he reiterates "yeah, but no-scenario servers are still something to consider" instead of just STFU on that point and discussing others.

Scenarios. Not "senarios".

Also, awful idea.

See what WoW steals and implements better.  WAR did introduce some good frameworks for ideas.  I think this is hard to argue.  If your contention is with implementation of these new ideas, then I agree. 

This. That's basically the weak spot right now. The two big things that WoW could take right now (queuing from anywhere and XP in BGs) would drag a lot of players back. But they have a lot of time to work that out. WAR is going to take a long time (like DAoC-years) to get right for the audience that stays. So unfortunately along the way it'd be easy for Blizzard to steal back whatever small percentage of players aren't carrying two accounts through even just queuing from anywhere. There's a lot more people at the cap in WoW than who are leveling up in WAR and while running around the world for Achievements and Hallow's End stuff can be interesting, jumping into a BG occasionally can also.

RvR unto itself can be awesome but I think its relevance to a mass audience has yet to be proven. It requires people care more about a game than most gamers do and be more social with randoms than they're predisposed to be.

What the fuck man. No shift key and a space between the exclamation and the word? Seriously, what the fuck. Go away. Also, a one word post? Lol.

Socializing? MMOs have more and more catered to the opposite of this since their birth. Tools which have made life "easier" in mmos like LFG and, ala WAR, open groups. You'd think it would promote it, but it backfired. Open groups allow the anonymous to come and go without having to make any attempt at being social.

You make a good point. In the end, as with DAoC, this will be a Guild vs Guild game not RvR.

Please to be fixing your quote.  I never said that, Darniaq did.

@Ossigor: people want to come and go as they please. The mass market comes with their intact friend groups already. MMOs grew when they stopped forcing social interaction and instead recognized the compelling element for what it is: pickup games to have some fun and get some stuff done. Yes, this has meant a "devolution" from social experiments like Underlight into basically a game which has social elements in it. But that's evolution based on consumer feedback of the most important type: money.

I say bullshit.  DAOC had around 350k subs at max I believe.  The MMORPG audience was much, much smaller back then.  Of course, players also had less choice.  But undoubtedly, some of the players WoW brought it in will be of the same mindset of the DAOC players back in the day.  I'm sure it's not as much that want sport PvP and sport raiding ala WoW.  But I'm also sure it would mean that a well done modern open RvR focused game would at least end up with double the subs of DAOC back in the day.  It could be much more than that.  It also happens to be a very good way to compete with WoW, giving players a different experience but similar enough not to cause any 'wtf is this shit' issues like Eve does.

WAR right now doesn't feel fresh or interesting because it's too little open RvR, too much scenario grind, too much useless PvE content.  The stuff there's too much of is exactly what people did in WoW albeit with a slightly different purpose.  The stuff there isn't enough of is what sets it apart.

I fear warhammer may be doomed to 500k or so subs just due to when its releasing. A lot of my friends started playing wow for some of the achivement stuff now that the 3.0 patch came out. I myself enjoy both war and wow but my biggest problem about war is I want to play it for RVR but there is not enough RVR at my level on my server which makes me play wow.

You're right about the WAR that exists vs the WAR that could compete with WoW. However, the above bold is extremely important when talking about market potential.

It's not our money nor career on the line when we talk about what could work. We are free to sit here and say "SL level of choice with WoW style with COD4 combat with GW henchmen and Spore level of customization" could be awesome too. But to put money against that you need to go by precedent.

My point about RvR is entirely about precedent. No matter how many players DAoC ever had at its peak, nowhere near all of them were playing RvR, and only Mythic knows that percentage and I suspect it wasn't anywhere near 80% since they put PQs and Scenarios in WAR to try and attract more players. DAoC was fine when the whole genre was niche and focused on the U.S. and occasionally Europe with the Far East being ignored. But in this world where registered accounts are measured in the hundreds of millions, and one title commands over 11 million actual paying subscribers, big IP holders and bigger publishers are not looking for a mere 100-200k accounts. That's indie-level stuff there, not something you unlike a $50mil+ warchest to tap into.

What we need is incentive to do realm vs realm, quests and PQ's. Double the bonuses given to the after mentioned points and you'll start seeing LOTS of people again. It's ridiculous to get easier exp and better gear through scenarios.

We don't need new type of servers. We need better carrots dangling on sticks to follow  :why_so_serious:

I haven't even played the game, but what if some way if you complete a PQ you get a 3 hour RVR x 100% buff. You complete a scenario you get a 3 hour RVR x 100% buff. So you triple your RVR XP.

Promotion of PQ use, promotion of only running one or 2 scenarios, and a sizable promotion to doing RvR.

EDITED ABOVE AND ADDED: Seems like you'd log in and go..."Hey, lets knock out a PQ and a scenario and get some RVR on!"

That's what they were driving for: PQs + Scenarios + RvR all living in harmony and letting players bounce around. But two of those three are PvE-based that WoW does much better (there's no direct analog of PQs which are cool but are really outdoor group-required instances that WoW does have). And all three are affected by two major problems:

1) World size- It's too big and takes too long to canvas to bother taking the chance that nothing's there when you arrive.
2) Population splintering- Racial pairings provide inadequate funneling and therefore a very hit or miss RvR experience, which you found out once you hoofed your way out there.

Hence, Scenarios in between quest grinding. Both are readily available and fun, but the things that make them better in WAR than WoW are the two easiest things to steal back (XP for PvP and anywhere queueing).

WAR is best served as a WoW competitor when all three elements work together. The major hole is the biggest competitive advantage, thus all the talk about how to improve RvR for the audience that wants it and which will likely never get served it in this form in WoW. But I suspect it's going to end up like "better combat" in SWG: big difference betwee what the players asked for and ultimately what they got.

This is exactly what DAoC does at 50.  It hands you your big boy pants at level 50 and shoves you into rvr.

Notice how I mentioned RvR in that last sentence.  I'm assuming you know fuck all about it because of statement like this :
But no, please tell me why your opinion is valid when you didn't even play the ONLY rvr game before WAR.  DAoC's RvR is still to this day the best system implemented and you would think that Mythic would have used what worked.

I left some spelling and gramatical errors in this post so you will have something useful to add to your reply instead of just the usual drivel that type.

Because he represents over 90% of the mmo player base, and when fuckwits like you manage to drive them all off WAR will end up as an AOC redux?

I sense a disturbance in the force.

:awesome_for_real:

There's nothing wrong with wanting a good RvR game. It's only wrong to expect it at any pace you define, and to expect its final delivery to appeal to everyone.

Worrying about whether scenarios are playable or not at 40 is pointless if most people won't reach that rank due to burnout from scenarios being the only viable way to level.

Didn't you see?  They doubled RvR xp.  That's almost twice as much!

Open RvR hasn't been a proven to appeal to the masses, nor more than Open Sandbox PvP is. But as much as we all like to debate that the base issue is grind. If this game was strictly pve than sure the grind would be remotely forgivable but for a game with a "pvp" focus it sure has funny ways to show it. Why my friends WAR a pvp game, insist you grind scenarios still your sick of them in order for you to reach level 40 in a sane manner? Here some mmo design logic;

The amount of content your game has is directly proportional to the amount of things to do once you reach the end game.

From that statement I can say WAR wasted a lot of development time.

Hang with me here.

Why are scenarios viewed so poorly?

Scenarios reduce (but don't eliminate) population imbalances and guarantee a quick fight.  Open RvR people want more rewards and don't like waiting around for a fight so they want more people to  do it.

Is the answer perhaps instanced keep fights (like they do city fights)?  No traveling required.  If you see that your keep is taken queue up to take it back, once the queue is filled then off you go.

Yea, lame idea, but I'm throwing it out there.

The appeal of scenarios starts to wear off after awhile. The only reason to do scenarios, currently, is because they offer the best return on XP gain. You do scenarios to gain levels. But you can only do Tor Anroc so many times before you're ready to shoot yourself in the head. Once you're finished, you didn't actually accomplish anything worthwhile. You're just grinding to get ranks so that you can level cap and start having fun, which is doing keep sieges. And your only downtime in between grinding scenarios is running PvE quests to get some gear so you don't fall behind the curve and remain semi-useful.

I don't think the problem is as dire as others make it out to be and I think with the right amount of tweaking, they should be able to get things turned around. I'm still enjoying myself, but Mythic is going to need to do some work to keep me coming back long term.

In and of themselves, scenarios are fine.  There may be problems with individual ones, but on a whole, good stuff.

When they are the only realistic way to advance, it causes both burnout and shows how lacking the other aspects of the game are.  Their 'popularity' isn't a problem, it's a symptom of a much larger flaw.

Repetition mostly. But also because WoW already has them. If WAR only had viable PvP in the form of Scenarios, there's no reason to leave the far more polished and older (so players are more invested) WoW.