Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 16, 2021, 07:48:02 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Warhammer Online (Moderator: tazelbain)  |  Topic: WAR RvR Video from E3. 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8 Go Down Print
Author Topic: WAR RvR Video from E3.  (Read 78586 times)
Mrbloodworth
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15148


on: July 15, 2008, 01:15:41 PM

Yes, its on IGN.

I can't see it from work =(

EDIT: I downloaded it, not sure if it is from E3. Anyway, there it is.

Today's How-To: Scrambling a Thread to the Point of Incoherence in Only One Post with MrBloodworth . - schild
www.mrbloodworthproductions.com  www.amuletsbymerlin.com
pxib
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4671


Reply #1 on: July 15, 2008, 01:31:54 PM

That video does them no favors... I don't know how the game plays, but it doesn't LOOK good. All I see is the chaotic, largely meaningless reality of zerg on zerg PvP. That there are only about four distinct sounds is disappointing, and the spell animations are annoying rather than visibly unique. Except that giant falling rock thing... whatever that is. I'd feel embarrassed casting that, not mighty. Characters seem to have more unique looks than they used to, I couldn't pick up classes by their cookie-cutter appearance. Those solid, unwaving capes everybody was wearing REALLY brought back DAoC memories. Memories of being in the train across the frontier. Capecapecapecapecapecapecapecapecapecape...

if at last you do succeed, never try again
cevik
I'm Special
Posts: 1690

I've always wondered about the All Black People Eat Watermelons


Reply #2 on: July 15, 2008, 01:40:45 PM

That there are only about four distinct sounds is disappointing,

I don't think it would have been so bad if 3 of those 4 sounds had been something other than explosions.

The above space is available for purchase.  Send a Private Message for a complete price list and payment information.  Thank you for your business.
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 41993

the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring


WWW
Reply #3 on: July 15, 2008, 02:34:47 PM

That does remind me of the same sort of grabasstastic chaotic clusterfuck that most PUG RVR fights ended up being.

Brogarn
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1372


Reply #4 on: July 15, 2008, 02:51:23 PM

That video sucked. I'm both disappointed and elated by that fact. Disappointed because I was hoping that Mythic would kick some ass since I'm a DAoC fan. Elated because I wouldn't be able to play it anyways due to my current social life and now see that I won't be missing anything.
Soln
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4736

the opportunity for evil is just delicious


Reply #5 on: July 15, 2008, 03:31:00 PM

Hmm.  Hopefully there's topping.  Seems very 1999 with new models/textures otherwise  Not very tactical. For instance, is there the ability climb walls and build siege engines?  You could/can at least do those things in DAoC.

It was particularly sad to see the throne room mosh pit.  That ended every PUG train in DAoC.  And it may be that's how this RvR supposed to end.  But frankly it should be more -- at least by now, 2008.

What's with the quest "!" over the mages (?) head.  He become a quest giver?  Sort of a kill-me-now sign to the enemy.

Xeyi
Terracotta Army
Posts: 104


Reply #6 on: July 15, 2008, 03:41:38 PM

There's certainly a lot of magic effects going on.  I'm sure some of those Dwarfs had laser cannons.
Triforcer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4662


Reply #7 on: July 15, 2008, 03:45:50 PM

The problem is that very early on in the development process, Mythic adopted the artistic affectation that "CROWD CONTROL IS BAD."  Its one of those decisions that reeks of idiosyncratic designer snobbery rather than having a basis in logic (see: no /dance). 

....well, without crowd control, you have people whaling on each other and healers healing them.  That's, um, it.  No tactical dimension at all.   

All life begins with Nu and ends with Nu.  This is the truth!  This is my belief! At least for now...
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 41993

the Confederate flag underneath the stone in my class ring


WWW
Reply #8 on: July 15, 2008, 03:56:15 PM

The problem is that very early on in the development process, Mythic adopted the artistic affectation that "CROWD CONTROL IS BAD."  Its one of those decisions that reeks of idiosyncratic designer snobbery rather than having a basis in logic (see: no /dance). 

....well, without crowd control, you have people whaling on each other and healers healing them.  That's, um, it.  No tactical dimension at all.   

You forgot collision detection, and I think they did as well.

Krakrok
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2185


Reply #9 on: July 15, 2008, 04:04:11 PM


This game is still around?  awesome, for real
cevik
I'm Special
Posts: 1690

I've always wondered about the All Black People Eat Watermelons


Reply #10 on: July 15, 2008, 05:01:39 PM

You forgot collision detection, and I think they did as well.

Last time this subject came up we lost 25 posts.

The above space is available for purchase.  Send a Private Message for a complete price list and payment information.  Thank you for your business.
pxib
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4671


Reply #11 on: July 15, 2008, 05:07:14 PM

I think it's time to state outright that good gameplay videos need to lie to the players. The game doesn't look like a gameplay video while you're playing it, because you're concentrating on your own character and your target. You get a sort of tunnel vision that CANNOT be simulated just by replaying the video for someone unaware of the situation. Falsified, directed videos can therefore feel more "real" than the raw footage.

This is also why so many PvP videos on Youtube are so relentlessly uninspiring.

Blizzard is, once again, the company to watch. Their "gameplay" videos have been consistantly and capably stage-managed to show off the coolest possible moments while players use their flashiest skills and generally look like they're kicking ass. Action is the focus and chaos is kept to a minimum, usually appearing only in the background. Players do not feel betrayed because they still feel badass in the game. They see themselves doing awesome things in-game whether it's the focus of a screenshot or not.

if at last you do succeed, never try again
Mrbloodworth
Terracotta Army
Posts: 15148


Reply #12 on: July 15, 2008, 05:19:28 PM

I think that was a devcam walk through.

Today's How-To: Scrambling a Thread to the Point of Incoherence in Only One Post with MrBloodworth . - schild
www.mrbloodworthproductions.com  www.amuletsbymerlin.com
Lum
Developers
Posts: 1608

Hellfire Games


Reply #13 on: July 15, 2008, 05:52:18 PM

The problem is that very early on in the development process, Mythic adopted the artistic affectation that "CROWD CONTROL IS BAD."  Its one of those decisions that reeks of idiosyncratic designer snobbery rather than having a basis in logic (see: no /dance). 

It's an artistic affectation I agree with. There is nothing more psychologically frustrating to a player than having control removed from you and watching you and your teammates die helplessly.

There are ways to accomplish the goals of crowd control in pvp (enabling melee to close range with ranged, giving outnumbered forces a chance at survival especially against less skilled players) without making the target's keyboard useless for X seconds.

I actually have somewhat of a reputation on my team for having smoke pour from my ears whenever the words "crowd control" are mentioned.

(Disclaimer: I have no idea how this would actually relate to WAR, as I do not have a beta account for hopefully obvious reasons and have not been following discussion of the game very closely.)
« Last Edit: July 15, 2008, 05:59:02 PM by Lum »
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #14 on: July 15, 2008, 05:58:08 PM

While I too am not very fond of crowd control, I think that there is a huge difference between applications that often gets disregarded.  A mez, root, or snare is one thing, especially when they break upon damage.  They can be used tactically to great effect without causing too much frustration to the person suffering the effects.  Stuns on the other hand are the dumbest addition to a pvp game that I've ever seen.  Forcing players to take damage for x seconds while being helpless is just poorly thought out implementation.  On that regard, I'll agree with Lum completely. 

Then there's the issue of stealth... which I also believe has no place in a pvp game.  Balancing initiative is virtually impossible in an evolving game. 

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

-  Mark Twain
Triforcer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4662


Reply #15 on: July 15, 2008, 06:20:54 PM

The problem is that very early on in the development process, Mythic adopted the artistic affectation that "CROWD CONTROL IS BAD."  Its one of those decisions that reeks of idiosyncratic designer snobbery rather than having a basis in logic (see: no /dance). 

It's an artistic affectation I agree with. There is nothing more psychologically frustrating to a player than having control removed from you and watching you and your teammates die helplessly.

There are ways to accomplish the goals of crowd control in pvp (enabling melee to close range with ranged, giving outnumbered forces a chance at survival especially against less skilled players) without making the target's keyboard useless for X seconds.

I actually have somewhat of a reputation on my team for having smoke pour from my ears whenever the words "crowd control" are mentioned.

(Disclaimer: I have no idea how this would actually relate to WAR, as I do not have a beta account for hopefully obvious reasons and have not been following discussion of the game very closely.)

As a practical matter, I don't dispute player frustration with CC.  But people generally aren't willing to recognize the downside of removing it:  losing a significant tactical dimension from PvP.  You are basically left with tank'n'heal. 

Here's an example of how it forces you into certain design decisions.  You say "there are other ways for melee to close with ranged."  Ok-- let's say they can do that.  Now, your ranged has to either:

1)  Have crowd control to reestablish range (which, according to the trendy view, sends the meleer into helpless rage and he cancels his account instantly), or

2)  The ranged has the same amount of armor as a warrior.  In this scenario, the "ranged" and melee characters stand three inches from each other the entire fight and trade blows.

I guess #2 leaves melee happy because they aren't separated from their opponent for even a nanosecond.  But doesn't it allow more depth to design around #1, giving BOTH combatants a chance (depending on skill and timing) to either close the gap or reestablish it, all the while testing them along another axis as well (actual combat)?   I don't see a magic third way between #1 and #2- either ranged can keep/reestablish distance (necessitating CC) or he can't (and wears plate mail).     
« Last Edit: July 15, 2008, 06:23:01 PM by Triforcer »

All life begins with Nu and ends with Nu.  This is the truth!  This is my belief! At least for now...
pxib
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4671


Reply #16 on: July 15, 2008, 06:26:25 PM

I think that was a devcam walk through.
So intercut the devcam walkthrough with exciting, staged moments showcasing player abilities, spell effects, and animations.

if at last you do succeed, never try again
Lum
Developers
Posts: 1608

Hellfire Games


Reply #17 on: July 15, 2008, 06:38:17 PM

Here's an example of how it forces you into certain design decisions.  You say "there are other ways for melee to close with ranged."  Ok-- let's say they can do that.  Now, your ranged has to either:

1)  Have crowd control to reestablish range (which, according to the trendy view, sends the meleer into helpless rage and he cancels his account instantly), or

2)  The ranged has the same amount of armor as a warrior.  In this scenario, the "ranged" and melee characters stand three inches from each other the entire fight and trade blows.

Or the ranged character has an escape ability on a timer (similar to Vanish for rogues in WoW).

Or the ranged character has some healing ability (potions/whatever) that gives them a few seconds of flexibility.

Or the ranged character simply dies, because he's in a 1v1 (which is arguably impossible to keep both balanced and fun in every situation throughout an MMO assuming differing playstyles/abilities without making every character functionally identical) vs a character that can kill him in a situation where that character is designed to kill him, whereas ranged characters may have been intended to act as second-line troops firing from behind a front line of melee.

Regardless, my point is that all of these imply interesting choices and/or consequences. Being impotently frozen out of controlling your character is not interesting.
Soln
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4736

the opportunity for evil is just delicious


Reply #18 on: July 15, 2008, 06:43:15 PM

A minor counter:  what about all the out-of-range nukings (e.g. turrets) that happen?  I saw a lot of nuking happening in that video -- massive ranged damage players on the field with their healers would be challenged with.  I'm not sure that's also fun/fair since players also have no way of countering or avoiding them.
trias_e
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1296


Reply #19 on: July 15, 2008, 06:55:20 PM

Quote
It's an artistic affectation I agree with. There is nothing more psychologically frustrating to a player than having control removed from you and watching you and your teammates die helplessly.

There are ways to accomplish the goals of crowd control in pvp (enabling melee to close range with ranged, giving outnumbered forces a chance at survival especially against less skilled players) without making the target's keyboard useless for X seconds.

I actually have somewhat of a reputation on my team for having smoke pour from my ears whenever the words "crowd control" are mentioned.

(Disclaimer: I have no idea how this would actually relate to WAR, as I do not have a beta account for hopefully obvious reasons and have not been following discussion of the game very closely.)

I feel like this is just a tad extreme.  If you are making a DaoC/WoW style game, it just seems like you are throwing away options unnecessarily.

Frost Nova for the mage in WoW is a good example of solid crowd control.  It's short, close range, most everyone can break it with a timered ability, you can still do things when it affects you, but at the same time it's quite a bit of fun for the mage and quite effective in certain situations.  I feel like my gameplay as a mage was massively enhanced by it.  I'm sure other classes were mildly frustrated by it...but certainly not so much that it harmed their gameplay experience.

Sorcerers/Healers/Bards at release in DaoC were examples of bad crown control .  Long range, long term, something you didn't even see coming half of the time and then all of the sudden two of your groupmates are just dead while you still have 15 seconds of being mezzed.

I think as long as your crowd control is not extreme, short, personalized, and something you can always see coming, it can be and should be an enriching part of the overall MMORPG PvP gameplay experience.  Not saying you couldn't live without it...but I'm not sure I would have too much fun as a class in any MMORPG PvP that didn't have some sort of personalized self-survival crowd control.  My friar in DaoC taught me very well that this is just not that fun to me (although I did enjoy my friar as a beatdown laying backup healer).  Being able to tactically employ crowd control is just...well, essential to my mindset after playing a mage in WoW.  Not being able to do it would piss me off something fierce, even if no one else could do it either.

 Some more ideas for good crowd control:

A pacifism type spell which allows the character to move around freely but not attack for 3 or 4 seconds, a knockback spell which only takes away control for a split second (not to be confused with knockdown), an 'empathy' type spell which forces the character to take 150% of the damage they dish out back for 6-7 seconds, very brief stuns which quickly reach immunity...I'm sure others can think of plenty others.  Just pilfer Guild Wars' ideas, they had far more interesting skills than any other MMORPG to date, and sticking their skills in a 'normal' diku would result in some damn fun classes.
« Last Edit: July 15, 2008, 07:03:08 PM by trias_e »
Triforcer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4662


Reply #20 on: July 15, 2008, 07:17:44 PM

Here's an example of how it forces you into certain design decisions.  You say "there are other ways for melee to close with ranged."  Ok-- let's say they can do that.  Now, your ranged has to either:

1)  Have crowd control to reestablish range (which, according to the trendy view, sends the meleer into helpless rage and he cancels his account instantly), or

2)  The ranged has the same amount of armor as a warrior.  In this scenario, the "ranged" and melee characters stand three inches from each other the entire fight and trade blows.

Or the ranged character has an escape ability on a timer (similar to Vanish for rogues in WoW).

Or the ranged character has some healing ability (potions/whatever) that gives them a few seconds of flexibility.

Or the ranged character simply dies, because he's in a 1v1 (which is arguably impossible to keep both balanced and fun in every situation throughout an MMO assuming differing playstyles/abilities without making every character functionally identical) vs a character that can kill him in a situation where that character is designed to kill him, whereas ranged characters may have been intended to act as second-line troops firing from behind a front line of melee.

Regardless, my point is that all of these imply interesting choices and/or consequences. Being impotently frozen out of controlling your character is not interesting.

Your third point makes sense.  As to 1, I'd argue that's still CC.  Maybe psychologically, it makes a difference whether A) Your character is slowed/rooted/snared/silenced/disarmed, or B)  your opponent is speeded up or uses a trick (blink, vanish, etc).  I guess you'd know the answer to that much better than most of us.   

All life begins with Nu and ends with Nu.  This is the truth!  This is my belief! At least for now...
tmp
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4257

POW! Right in the Kisser!


Reply #21 on: July 15, 2008, 07:25:41 PM

....well, without crowd control, you have people whaling on each other and healers healing them.  That's, um, it.  No tactical dimension at all.   
With crowd control though, the PvP tactics largely boil down to "cc'ers cc everyone they can, rest of the zerg ball target-assists the leader to roll hapless victims one by one". While there's some very baiscs tactics to that approach, i'd argue it ain't much fun for anyone involved since the requirement of quick-thinking and reacting to the events as they happen is removed from most of the participants.

Not to say the people hitting each other and healers healing them is that much different _without_ CC, but the "tactical dimension" brought by CC just doesn't enhance game experience in practice, imo. It's rather easy to verify playing the LotRO 'monsterplay' -- the CC element is very heavy there as it's applied straight from PvE, and it's perhaps the single most frequent complain about the whole experience... to the point it's being heavily curbed with next game patch.
Lum
Developers
Posts: 1608

Hellfire Games


Reply #22 on: July 15, 2008, 07:29:41 PM

Your third point makes sense.  As to 1, I'd argue that's still CC.  Maybe psychologically, it makes a difference whether A) Your character is slowed/rooted/snared/silenced/disarmed, or B)  your opponent is speeded up or uses a trick (blink, vanish, etc).  I guess you'd know the answer to that much better than most of us.   

I'm not sure if you're trying to imply "well, only you would know the difference because it's all in your mind" or "well, only you'd know the difference because someone stunlocked you as a child" or if I'm just being Sensitive Guy. Regardless, the difference is what I listed earlier - the other player has not lost control of their character, having to watch events passively.
tmp
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4257

POW! Right in the Kisser!


Reply #23 on: July 15, 2008, 07:40:31 PM

On second thought, the whole "without cc there's just people beating each other up and that's not tactical" thing is quite bunk. When you consider there's been couple thousand years worth of military tactics developed by now around exactly this very concept -- people beating each other up without magic ways to turn the enemy into sheep or slow them down or make them fall asleep until hit with a stick...
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7590


Reply #24 on: July 15, 2008, 07:44:33 PM

Let us rephrase.

Will WAR replace all the CC found in your average DIKU with new and exciting ways to wage battle?


Prediction: No.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
LC
Terracotta Army
Posts: 908


Reply #25 on: July 15, 2008, 07:47:28 PM

Who really cares. The game is going to suck crowd control or not. Those guys that die are going to spawn at a graveyard 30 seconds away without any real consequences. They will run directly back to the fight creating a failure loop. It will turn into a game of who can stay awake the longest.
Triforcer
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4662


Reply #26 on: July 15, 2008, 07:51:46 PM

Your third point makes sense.  As to 1, I'd argue that's still CC.  Maybe psychologically, it makes a difference whether A) Your character is slowed/rooted/snared/silenced/disarmed, or B)  your opponent is speeded up or uses a trick (blink, vanish, etc).  I guess you'd know the answer to that much better than most of us.   

I'm not sure if you're trying to imply "well, only you would know the difference because it's all in your mind" or "well, only you'd know the difference because someone stunlocked you as a child" or if I'm just being Sensitive Guy. Regardless, the difference is what I listed earlier - the other player has not lost control of their character, having to watch events passively.

None of the above.  Just meant that since you are in the biz, you are more qualified in figuring out what actually causes people to cancel their accounts than I am.  No intent to offend. 

All life begins with Nu and ends with Nu.  This is the truth!  This is my belief! At least for now...
Count Nerfedalot
Terracotta Army
Posts: 961


Reply #27 on: July 15, 2008, 07:57:06 PM

Quote
      Sorcerers/Healers/Bards at release in DaoC were examples of bad crown control .

Um,  Enchanters at release in EQ were the ultimate examples of bad crowd control.  Two enchanters could keep someone charmed essentially forever, dragging them around with them wherever they went like a pet.

Eliminating ALL crowd control from PvP does seem a bit draconian.  There are lots of effects as described in other posts here that can add interesting tactical options without being overpowering.  Also add Taunts, Intercepts, and physical blocking (requires collision detection) to that list.  The key is balance, as with everything else in PvP.  Balance is hard.  Nerfing things into uselessness (or nonexistance) is much easier.

The real problem is that crowd control, like ranged combat, is very hard, if not impossible, to implement in a way that is fun and balanced for both PvP and PvE simultaneously.  Far too many ranged classes (more often archers than casters for some reason) have been nerfed into uselessness in PvE for the sake of PvP balance.  Any developer having both PvP and PvE in their game needs to work extra hard to avoid gimping entire classes in one or the other by balancing them separately.

Disclosure: I was an archer at DAoC's release.  I was nerfed into uselessness in PvE for the sake of PvP balance a couple months in.  I'm not bitter, I just quit. Like I quit CoH when they nerfed my blaster into wimpitude for the sake of the upcoming PvP in CoV (the post-30 exp wall was also a factor), and like I would have quit EQ when I learned how useless Ranger's bows were, had there been ANY other games to choose from at the time. 

OK, I lied.  I AM still bitter about that DAoC nerf.  Mostly because it was solely needed for PvP.  Archers in PvE were by no means uber prior to the nerf, but were totally gimped and unable to help a group against anything even con or higher post nerf.  All because lazy developers balanced their ability based on PvP rather than separating PvP from PvE.

Yes, I know I'm paranoid, but am I paranoid enough?
UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #28 on: July 15, 2008, 08:41:13 PM

On second thought, the whole "without cc there's just people beating each other up and that's not tactical" thing is quite bunk. When you consider there's been couple thousand years worth of military tactics developed by now around exactly this very concept -- people beating each other up without magic ways to turn the enemy into sheep or slow them down or make them fall asleep until hit with a stick...

RL has other forms of 'crowd control', like injuries that slow soldiers down, the condition of terrain (e.g. forcing your opponents to run uphill / through mud) having to actually stop and block / avoid ranged fire (locked down behind cover) and a number of such other things.

That's too sophisticated for online games at the moment, so some degree of CC is a reasonable alternative to provide tactical options.

Also, quite a few of those RL situations say that range > melee, which makes all those martial artists feel unhappy in paying the sub fee to play a character that is automatically gimped because they keep getting owned by rifle fire.

Fordel
Terracotta Army
Posts: 8306


Reply #29 on: July 15, 2008, 09:40:25 PM

It's a question of duration, range and radius.


CC in DaoC blows chunks because your entire group got locked into place helpless for 60 seconds, in a game where it took less then six seconds to wipe the group out.

and the gate is like I TOO AM CAPABLE OF SPEECH
tmp
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4257

POW! Right in the Kisser!


Reply #30 on: July 15, 2008, 10:30:24 PM

RL has other forms of 'crowd control', like injuries that slow soldiers down, the condition of terrain (e.g. forcing your opponents to run uphill / through mud) having to actually stop and block / avoid ranged fire (locked down behind cover) and a number of such other things.

That's too sophisticated for online games at the moment, so some degree of CC is a reasonable alternative to provide tactical options.
That's a fair point. Some of these things are implemented like the ranged fire locking people down, but made me wonder if any MMO tried to modify movement speed depending on terrain type (road, mud, going uphill/downhill etc) and if any did, what was the outcome...
Trippy
Administrator
Posts: 22831


Reply #31 on: July 15, 2008, 10:56:30 PM

On second thought, the whole "without cc there's just people beating each other up and that's not tactical" thing is quite bunk. When you consider there's been couple thousand years worth of military tactics developed by now around exactly this very concept -- people beating each other up without magic ways to turn the enemy into sheep or slow them down or make them fall asleep until hit with a stick...

RL has other forms of 'crowd control', like injuries that slow soldiers down, the condition of terrain (e.g. forcing your opponents to run uphill / through mud) having to actually stop and block / avoid ranged fire (locked down behind cover) and a number of such other things.

That's too sophisticated for online games at the moment, so some degree of CC is a reasonable alternative to provide tactical options.
Actually it's not but it's not something you normally see in MMORPGs. MP FPSes have a lot of this sort of stuff, though. E.g. "suppressive fire" (forcing your opponents to duck behind cover) does work in games like CoD 4. Gears of War with the whole "blind fire" mechanic does this as well.

Once you mix in melee combat with ranged combat, however, it messes it all up unless melee have a way of avoiding/dodging/blocking incoming fire (a la GunZ).
UnSub
Contributor
Posts: 8064


WWW
Reply #32 on: July 16, 2008, 02:18:42 AM

RL has other forms of 'crowd control', like injuries that slow soldiers down, the condition of terrain (e.g. forcing your opponents to run uphill / through mud) having to actually stop and block / avoid ranged fire (locked down behind cover) and a number of such other things.

That's too sophisticated for online games at the moment, so some degree of CC is a reasonable alternative to provide tactical options.
That's a fair point. Some of these things are implemented like the ranged fire locking people down, but made me wonder if any MMO tried to modify movement speed depending on terrain type (road, mud, going uphill/downhill etc) and if any did, what was the outcome...

Did WWIIOL try to get this ambitious?

Koyasha
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1363


Reply #33 on: July 16, 2008, 06:03:45 AM

I think the mix of melee and ranged is the primary thing that makes realistic 'crowd control' difficult to implement, because the technology is certainly there to include terrain movement modifiers, visual impairment, suppressing fire, and so on.  But when your melee guys have to compete with guys with ranged weaponry, you have to come up with alternate rules for your fictional world, because in real life ranged > melee, period.  Like Trippy noted, in FPS games you don't need crowd control because you don't need to make melee competitive.  An assault rifle is better than a crowbar, everyone knows that, and nobody expects the guy with the crowbar to be able to take down the guy with the assault rifle in a 'fair fight'.  Games that mix melee and ranged have to make it so that you can bring a knife to a gunfight and still be on even footing.

Regardless, passive 'crowd control' - that is, escape abilities, methods to control the shape of the battlefield, channel your opponents, etc, are better than 'active' crowd control - removing control of your enemy's character.  If you can put an obstacle in my path to make me circle around it, or create an area I can't move through at my full speed, or have your fighters stand in a row and block my path, that's a lot better than making my controls useless for a short period of time.  It's also more tactical, because mezzes or other forms of active CC do boil down to 'cc everyone you can, assist <leader> to kill them one at a time'.  In my opinion, spells like Web, Wall of Force/Stone/Fire/Ice, Entangle, and the ever-humble Grease (all from AD&D) would be much better options in MMOG combat than spells like WoW's Polymorph or Fear, or EQ's Mez.  And yet we see very few games that have 'battlefield-shaping' options in their spell repertoires, and those that do have very few of them.  Almost all spells directly affect the enemy rather than altering the battlefield to change tactical conditions to your favor.

-Do you honestly think that we believe ourselves evil? My friend, we seek only good. It's just that our definitions don't quite match.-
Ailanreanter, Arcanaloth
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #34 on: July 16, 2008, 07:15:02 AM

DAoC showed that escape abilities can be every bit as annoying as cc.  See SoS and charge.  Yes, charge... an ability added for offensive reasons was used by many as a way to flee. 

I think that cc in a game does work and does add a tactical element if three criteria are satisfied: 1) That classes exist in game with the ability to remove the effects in a brief amount of time (cure disease, cure NS, demezz, etc.),  2) That all forms of cc break on damage and 3) an immunity timer is in place such that a cc effect can't be continuously reapplied with the original duration. 

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

-  Mark Twain
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 8 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Warhammer Online (Moderator: tazelbain)  |  Topic: WAR RvR Video from E3.  
Jump to:  

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