Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 28, 2024, 02:19:31 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
we're back, baby
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Mythic-EA shuts down Warhammer beta, tells players to come back later 0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Mythic-EA shuts down Warhammer beta, tells players to come back later  (Read 354503 times)
Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #490 on: December 08, 2007, 06:43:36 AM

Everyone knows Tolkien stole Blizzards idea for a Fantasy Theme book.

Bastard.
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #491 on: December 08, 2007, 07:30:02 AM

That explains the giant yellow exclamation point over Gandalf's head.

Over and out.
Hutch
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1893


Reply #492 on: December 08, 2007, 07:40:55 AM

It's a giant yellow ring, wreathed in flame.

Plant yourself like a tree
Haven't you noticed? We've been sharing our culture with you all morning.
The sun will shine on us again, brother
Murgos
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7474


Reply #493 on: December 08, 2007, 07:52:51 AM

You're just talking out your ass.  DAOC RvR was very good.

my·o·pi·a (mī-ō'pē-ə) pronunciation
n.

   1. A visual defect in which distant objects appear blurred because their images are focused in front of the retina rather than on it; nearsightedness. Also called short sight.
   2. Lack of discernment or long-range perspective in thinking or planning: “For Lorca, New York is a symbol of spiritual myopia” (Edwin Honig).

"You have all recieved youre last warning. I am in the process of currently tracking all of youre ips and pinging your home adressess. you should not have commencemed a war with me" - Aaron Rayburn
NiX
Wiki Admin
Posts: 7770

Locomotive Pandamonium


Reply #494 on: December 08, 2007, 01:52:49 PM

DAoC RvR was good, but it had glaring flaws in the system. I despise PVP and prefer to just grind until I get bored and move on. I actually got into a casual group of people who would run the RvR battlegrounds and try to take keeps. It actually had some fun to it. Then they did the whole /level shit and most of the lower end BGs died a horrible death.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #495 on: December 09, 2007, 01:29:28 PM

Yeah, I'm very amused by the "we want a PvE encounter for the capture" nature of this question.  The flags are flags in WoW's BG becasue.. well..  PLAYERS are the "boss mob"  Once they're dead (or distracted, or CC'd) clicky clicky.   Seems much more PvPish than "Oh well the captian is still up we can run off on our merry way and not worry about defending."

In practice DAoC lords were trivial assuming you had (pvp) control of the room. They were just an way to demonstrate to the system that you really did control the room and they can hand over the keep now. They were never a raid encounter or anything crazy. Keep lords were just a shiny version of clicky clicky.

I doubt WAR will be any different. If your team is strong enough and organised enough to beat the living, it'll always be strong and organised enough to beat the npcs.


Quote from: Hoax
My biggest pet peeve on this sub-board is the people who insist on holding up "RvR" as some kind of great accomplishment in persistent world pvp.

I don't think anyone who played daoc properly ever claimed that it was world pvp in the sense that EvE or SB are world pvp.

RvR != WoW BGs
RvR != Guild Wars
RvR != EVE
RvR != sb.exe

RvR is just a different PvP configuration that's never been revisited since DAoC, and remains the only serious attempt ever to make a casual friendly game with an endgame pvp focus. So, if, like the WAR team, you are trying to make another casual friendly game with an endgame pvp focus, it would seem to make more sense to build on the only thing that ever made a serious attempt to be a casual friendly game with an endgame pvp focus (which your team have initimate knowledge of), rather than just repeating Guild Wars.

I think RvR was a genuine accomplishment, but not a world pvp accomplishment in anything like the sense most people seem to mean when they say world pvp.

Quote from: IainC
Clearly. As everyone knows, skill point based advancement systems were entirely unknown before WoW came along and revolutionised the genre with its truly ground-breaking advances in games design.

However, HRose is correct to say that WoW is the reason WAR now has the skill point tree mechanic.

I dislike it as much as anyone when HRose has a point, but I suspect this is one of those times.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
IainC
Developers
Posts: 6538

Wargaming.net


WWW
Reply #496 on: December 09, 2007, 01:44:52 PM

Quote from: IainC
Clearly. As everyone knows, skill point based advancement systems were entirely unknown before WoW came along and revolutionised the genre with its truly ground-breaking advances in games design.

However, HRose is correct to say that WoW is the reason WAR now has the skill point tree mechanic.

I dislike it as much as anyone when HRose has a point, but I suspect this is one of those times.

In that case why then wasn't the mechanic in from the start? WoW and the talent system was around before WAR was designed after all. Is it perhaps more likely that the design was changed in response to beta feedback and not because someone logged into their WoW account and was blown away by the innovation?

- And in stranger Iains, even Death may die -

SerialForeigner Photography.
tmp
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4257

POW! Right in the Kisser!


Reply #497 on: December 09, 2007, 01:50:22 PM

However, HRose is correct to say that WoW is the reason WAR now has the skill point tree mechanic.

I dislike it as much as anyone when HRose has a point, but I suspect this is one of those times.
Someone on fohguild forum pointed out DAoC had realm point ability trees. IOW, they'd seem to copy the mechanics of their old game together with other aspects like the keeps. Yes, WoW also has similar character development but it doesn't necessarily mean it influenced their decision.
geldonyetich2
Terracotta Army
Posts: 811


Reply #498 on: December 09, 2007, 02:08:00 PM

In never bothered with the RvR in DAOC because I've enough experience with online multiplayer games to know that the concept of a battlefield with different action and no population restrictions is ultimately fated to be a popularity contest.  It doesn't really matter how good of a player you are, it's mostly about seeing if Camelot can field the most players.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #499 on: December 09, 2007, 02:15:38 PM

In never bothered with the RvR in DAOC because I've enough experience with online multiplayer games to know that the concept of a battlefield with different action and no population restrictions is ultimately fated to be a popularity contest.  It doesn't really matter how good of a player you are, it's mostly about seeing if Camelot can field the most players.

Your logic statement is flawed.  There were MANY times that the better players won in large scale battles.  Yes, numbers help... but the victor was often determined by both organization and skill.

What many people fail to understand is that in pre-ToA and classic server DAoC, gear meant less to success than it does in say WoW or many other MMO's.  This coupled to the fact that you could play the PvP game so many different ways is what made the game interesting to me.  Was it a "great" game, NO.  It had its flaws to be certain.  I just happen to find it the best MMO pvp experience to date.  That's why it ate my cash for over 5 years. 

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
geldonyetich2
Terracotta Army
Posts: 811


Reply #500 on: December 09, 2007, 02:28:43 PM

Perhaps I should have tried RvR.  Just because I've never played MMO PvP where skill > popularity doesn't mean that one couldn't be designed and, from the sounds of things, was implemented in DAOC.
Simond
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6742


Reply #501 on: December 09, 2007, 03:55:40 PM

In never bothered with the RvR in DAOC because I've enough experience with online multiplayer games to know that the concept of a battlefield with different action and no population restrictions is ultimately fated to be a popularity contest.  It doesn't really matter how good of a player you are, it's mostly about seeing if Camelot can field the most players.

Your logic statement is flawed.  There were MANY times that the better players won in large scale battles.  Yes, numbers help... but the victor was often determined by both organization and skill.
Read: Who could field the most AOE CC and/or stealthers at once.

"You're really a good person, aren't you? So, there's no path for you to take here. Go home. This isn't a place for someone like you."
Dash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 756


Reply #502 on: December 09, 2007, 04:27:00 PM

Two additions:

1. Talent trees for professions.
2. Adding persistent keeps, forts, and seige weaponry to open RVR.
So they are patching WoW and DAoC into the soulless turd? ;)
Clearly. As everyone knows, skill point based advancement systems were entirely unknown before WoW came along and revolutionised the genre with its truly ground-breaking advances in games design.

No sense denying it.  It's leaked out that WAR uses WASD for movement, just like you know who.  This is just more proof.

On a serious note, yay keeps.  I'm excited they're in but I'm concerned about the balance between them and scenarios.  Hopefully a good system can be put in place.  I wonder if they have an idea to help with Zerg and population imbalance in open world to go along with keeps. 

schild
Administrator
Posts: 60345


WWW
Reply #503 on: December 09, 2007, 04:33:02 PM

WASD should be standard in everything. It doesn't mean a goddamn thing. I'm not defending them, I'm just pointing out how stupid that was to even mention.
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #504 on: December 09, 2007, 04:59:10 PM

ESDF 4 life!

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
Dash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 756


Reply #505 on: December 09, 2007, 05:21:29 PM

WASD should be standard in everything. It doesn't mean a goddamn thing. I'm not defending them, I'm just pointing out how stupid that was to even mention.

 Ohhhhh, I see.  Whatever, I bet the R key is mapped to "reply" just like WoW.  I bet they have life bar and mana bar just like WoW.  They call their warrior classes "tanks" just like WoW.  Damage classes are "DPS" sound familiar???  They even market as an MMORPG!  HELLO!

(see what I did there?)

« Last Edit: December 09, 2007, 05:28:53 PM by Dash »
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #506 on: December 09, 2007, 05:47:58 PM

Replace WAR with DAoC and WoW with EQ1. Rockin' like it's Summer 2001! "DAoC uses / commands just like EQ1"
Johny Cee
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3454


Reply #507 on: December 09, 2007, 09:07:00 PM

ESDF 4 life!

ESDF is subpar compared to RDFG.  RDFG lets you set hotkeys on all sides,  while also giving you the bump on the F key if you need to go up to the numbers with your left hand.
Johny Cee
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3454


Reply #508 on: December 09, 2007, 09:13:36 PM

Quote from: IainC
Clearly. As everyone knows, skill point based advancement systems were entirely unknown before WoW came along and revolutionised the genre with its truly ground-breaking advances in games design.

However, HRose is correct to say that WoW is the reason WAR now has the skill point tree mechanic.

I dislike it as much as anyone when HRose has a point, but I suspect this is one of those times.

The video sounded more like Mythic was retreading the spec lines from DAoC,  which are an interesting idea in theory that failed in implementation for years.
geldonyetich2
Terracotta Army
Posts: 811


Reply #509 on: December 09, 2007, 09:14:14 PM

I usually stick with whatever the developers give me, which usually means WASD.  Trouble with that is I've noticed that certain combinations of movement and other keys tend to cause keyboard conflicts.  :P
Draegan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10043


Reply #510 on: December 10, 2007, 06:11:16 AM

I refuse to play a click-to-move MMO.  WASD is the best since you can hit tab quickly!

Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #511 on: December 10, 2007, 08:23:27 AM

ESDF 4 life!

ESDF is subpar compared to RDFG.  RDFG lets you set hotkeys on all sides,  while also giving you the bump on the F key if you need to go up to the numbers with your left hand.


RDFG is one letter to close to the center of the keyboard for me, very uncomfortable. I also prefer having the F bump on my index finger.

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #512 on: December 10, 2007, 08:32:04 AM

Don't forget about having Q and E for strafing.  It just feels natural, especially after having been trained to play that way for so many years. 

"Always do what is right. It will gratify half of mankind and astound the other."

-  Mark Twain
SnakeCharmer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3807


Reply #513 on: December 10, 2007, 08:37:58 AM

WASD is the best since you can hit tab quickly!

Right click to move is my preference.  Simple.  Easy.  Neat.

Johny Cee
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3454


Reply #514 on: December 10, 2007, 09:18:14 AM

In never bothered with the RvR in DAOC because I've enough experience with online multiplayer games to know that the concept of a battlefield with different action and no population restrictions is ultimately fated to be a popularity contest.  It doesn't really matter how good of a player you are, it's mostly about seeing if Camelot can field the most players.

Your logic statement is flawed.  There were MANY times that the better players won in large scale battles.  Yes, numbers help... but the victor was often determined by both organization and skill.
Read: Who could field the most AOE CC and/or stealthers at once.

Stealth was irrelevant in large fights.  AOE CC was virtually irrelevant,  because there was always some joker spamming a weak AOE damage skill that basically gave all your enemies free CC immunity.

Whichever side was better at herding cats generally won.
Ratman_tf
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3818


Reply #515 on: December 10, 2007, 09:22:27 AM

Whichever side was better at herding cats generally won.

 cry



 "What I'm saying is you should make friends with a few catasses, they smell funny but they're very helpful."
-Calantus makes the best of a smelly situation.
Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #516 on: December 10, 2007, 10:24:51 AM


Stealth was irrelevant in large fights.  AOE CC was virtually irrelevant,  because there was always some joker spamming a weak AOE damage skill that basically gave all your enemies free CC immunity.

Whichever side was better at herding cats generally won.



Now when said AoE CC was AoE Stun.  ACK! (which got nerfed soon enough at least)

Stealth *could* play a impact, it just usually required WAY more effort then the average buff boted stealther wanted to commit to.

Herding cats was certainly one of the biggest factors, but there really was a point on many realms/servers when population trumped everything else entirely.

It doesn't matter how good you are when you are literally outnumbered 10:1. I still fondly recall having the number of Albs attacking a keep being greater then the total population of my entire realm online (let alone the number of 50's online), on a Saturday night.  awesome, for real

You would be killing those bastards by the dozen, it didn't make a lick of difference outside of padding your personal RealmPoint ranking.

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
murdoc
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3036


Reply #517 on: December 10, 2007, 10:36:19 AM



Stealth was irrelevant in large fights.  AOE CC was virtually irrelevant,  because there was always some joker spamming a weak AOE damage skill that basically gave all your enemies free CC immunity.

Whichever side was better at herding cats generally won.


Oh man, you would get a big Mezz off, then all of a sudden the big blue hammers from a Thane would fill the screen and I'd throw my mouse yet again.

Have you tried the internet? It's made out of millions of people missing the point of everything and then getting angry about it
Soukyan
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1995


WWW
Reply #518 on: December 10, 2007, 11:02:39 AM


Stealth was irrelevant in large fights.  AOE CC was virtually irrelevant,  because there was always some joker spamming a weak AOE damage skill that basically gave all your enemies free CC immunity.

Whichever side was better at herding cats generally won.



Now when said AoE CC was AoE Stun.  ACK! (which got nerfed soon enough at least)

Stealth *could* play a impact, it just usually required WAY more effort then the average buff boted stealther wanted to commit to.

Herding cats was certainly one of the biggest factors, but there really was a point on many realms/servers when population trumped everything else entirely.

It doesn't matter how good you are when you are literally outnumbered 10:1. I still fondly recall having the number of Albs attacking a keep being greater then the total population of my entire realm online (let alone the number of 50's online), on a Saturday night.  awesome, for real

You would be killing those bastards by the dozen, it didn't make a lick of difference outside of padding your personal RealmPoint ranking.

Actually, being outnumbered with a good RvR group just meant more RPs for you. I played on Midgard/Palomides and we had a regular RvR group that really rocked. We could win most battles up to and including 3:1 scenarios, more if we were defending a fort. Of course, if we encountered the "regular" groups from other realms, the battles were always much tougher, but I had a blast and we did well, so while vast numbers could technically always win, I still loved RvR. Hell, I often longed for the nights when all three realms managed to field 80-100 players each because huge three-way battles were fun for me (I played a Healer). In any case, the herding cats bit is right. If you could manage the people, you could win the day.

"Life is no cabaret... we're inviting you anyway." ~Amanda Palmer
"Tree, awesome, numa numa, love triangle, internal combustion engine, mountain, walk, whiskey, peace, pascagoula" ~Lantyssa
"Les vrais paradis sont les paradis qu'on a perdus." ~Marcel Proust
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11839


Reply #519 on: December 11, 2007, 01:25:47 PM

ESDF 4 life!

ESDF is subpar compared to RDFG.  RDFG lets you set hotkeys on all sides,  while also giving you the bump on the F key if you need to go up to the numbers with your left hand.

Fuck this, I'm moving over to IJKL. That makes me 4 steps cooler than all of you.



And herding cats, as everyone said, is the thing.

In team PvP it's always the thing.

CS : Mostly about herding cats.
EvE : CATS IN SPACE, being herded.
TF2 : Cat herding with style.
DAoC : More Cat herding
Guild Wars : Hardcore instanced cat herding
Alterac Vally : Casual instanced cat herding
Real life team sports : Most important single thing is still cat herding.

People whinge about balance, gear, population, and so called essential classes. They mostly miss the point.

"People will not assume that what they read on the internet is trustworthy or that it carries any particular ­assurance or accuracy" - Lord Leveson
"Hyperbole is a cancer" - Lakov Sanite
geldonyetich2
Terracotta Army
Posts: 811


Reply #520 on: December 11, 2007, 01:44:34 PM

Well, that matches my impression of MMO PvP.

I will qualify it in cases where there's a small number of players involved.  Guild Wars doesn't really belong on that list because it's 8 on 8 controlled matches.  That's the good stuff - that's PvP that qualifies more as a game than cat herding.  However, in any scenario where you have unlimited players from either side, it's at least partly a popularity contest.  I'm not going to say that good tactics and gameplay won't help in this scenarios, but they tend to get drowned by the fundamental fact that one side has a genuine population advantage which simply isn't fair in terms of establishing balanced gameplay.
Murgos
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7474


Reply #521 on: December 11, 2007, 01:45:18 PM

And herding cats, as everyone said, is the thing.

In team PvP it's always the thing.

CS : Mostly about herding cats.
EvE : CATS IN SPACE, being herded.
TF2 : Cat herding with style.
DAoC : More Cat herding
Guild Wars : Hardcore instanced cat herding
Alterac Vally : Casual instanced cat herding
Real life team sports : Most important single thing is still cat herding.

People whinge about balance, gear, population, and so called essential classes. They mostly miss the point.  Cats.

FIFY.

"You have all recieved youre last warning. I am in the process of currently tracking all of youre ips and pinging your home adressess. you should not have commencemed a war with me" - Aaron Rayburn
Johny Cee
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3454


Reply #522 on: December 11, 2007, 02:12:07 PM

Well, that matches my impression of MMO PvP.

I will qualify it in cases where there's a small number of players involved.  Guild Wars doesn't really belong on that list because it's 8 on 8 controlled matches.  That's the good stuff - that's PvP that qualifies more as a game than cat herding. 

Cat herding is organization,  and getting the other players to follow an overall organization/strategy.  With a regular premade group (or group of regular players),  you just don't have to worry about hashing out primary, secondary, and tertiary roles because you follow previous strategies,  and can rely on general map/board/group strategies.

The people who don't have these learned heuristics are generally booted or kicked from your side.

Quote
However, in any scenario where you have unlimited players from either side, it's at least partly a popularity contest.  I'm not going to say that good tactics and gameplay won't help in this scenarios, but they tend to get drowned by the fundamental fact that one side has a genuine population advantage which simply isn't fair in terms of establishing balanced gameplay.

1. You contradict yourself.

2. Why is pop difference unfair,  but number of skilled players on a side fair?  In other words,  why is jumping someone 3 to 1 in UO/DAoC/Eve  unfair,  but team stacking in TF2 fine?  Bringing more numbers is the easiest way for casuals to compete with the serious players.

It's no fun to get run over by a zerg.  It's also no fun for your PUG to constantly get run over by the RR12 Alb gank group,  when you can't even field 2 healers.

Edit:  I bring up TF2 because of a couple nights on Team Red where you're staring down a Team Blue with Freshfruit, Mkvenner, Schild, Strazos, Nerf, Samwise, etc.  while you have 6 teammates who need to wear a football helmet to navigate their bedrooms.
« Last Edit: December 11, 2007, 03:45:19 PM by Johny Cee »
tazelbain
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6603

tazelbain


Reply #523 on: December 11, 2007, 02:55:04 PM

Never saw a herd cats problem with GW.  There were definitely twitch and hardcore issues.

The fundential issue of zerging is the simplicity of objectives.  When the players have one objective to affect the war ( or five objectives that can be done sequentially) then piling people on that objective is really the only choice.  Putting npcs and big doors around the objective doesn't change that.  It's strategically shallow, the equivalent of FPS Deathmatches.  Just as FPS players have moved on to more sophisticated matches, RvR needs to move on to more complex, over-lapping, semi-random objectives.  Players must be forced to make hard choices about which objectives pursue.  Objectives that require co-ordination between multiple groups should be common.  Some objectives should be unknown until other objectives are complete to force the players to re-evaluate plans.  The battlefield should change frequently so last nights optimal plan is not so today.  The conditions on the battlefield should influence the tactics used by the players, but players be given opportunity to influence those conditions.  Basically Mythic should be adding depth to RvR until even hardcore guilds shouting its "too deep" like Fury's tactical game.



"Me am play gods"
Johny Cee
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3454


Reply #524 on: December 11, 2007, 03:41:20 PM

Never saw a herd cats problem with GW.  There were definitely twitch and hardcore issues.

The fundential issue of zerging is the simplicity of objectives.  When the players have one objective to affect the war ( or five objectives that can be done sequentially) then piling people on that objective is really the only choice.  Putting npcs and big doors around the objective doesn't change that.  It's strategically shallow, the equivalent of FPS Deathmatches.  Just as FPS players have moved on to more sophisticated matches, RvR needs to move on to more complex, over-lapping, semi-random objectives.  Players must be forced to make hard choices about which objectives pursue.  Objectives that require co-ordination between multiple groups should be common.  Some objectives should be unknown until other objectives are complete to force the players to re-evaluate plans.  The battlefield should change frequently so last nights optimal plan is not so today.  The conditions on the battlefield should influence the tactics used by the players, but players be given opportunity to influence those conditions.  Basically Mythic should be adding depth to RvR until even hardcore guilds shouting its "too deep" like Fury's tactical game.

I agree with this.  Well said.
Pages: 1 ... 13 14 [15] 16 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  MMOG Discussion  |  Topic: Mythic-EA shuts down Warhammer beta, tells players to come back later  
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC