Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 29, 2017, 01:59:14 PM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Subscribe! | Shop: Amazon

***DONATION DRIVE 2 HAS BEGUN:
CLICK HERE TO BURN MONEY***
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Warhammer Online (Moderator: tazelbain)  |  Topic: Warhammer completed 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Warhammer completed  (Read 29779 times)
Shatter
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1407


Reply #35 on: April 07, 2009, 06:13:08 AM

How long is the losing side shut out of their capital? And holy fuck, they can't do things like access their banks, etc?

Between 12 and 24 hours I believe.  I think you get stuck at some refugee camp where you can think about what game you are going to play after you cancel your account
Delmania
Terracotta Army
Posts: 674


Reply #36 on: April 07, 2009, 06:18:20 AM

One of the biggest complaints about RvR has been that there are no consequences for letting the other side win, so there's no real reason to fight back.  Well, now we see the consequence, and it's pretty harsh, to the point where is demoralizes your playerbase and causes them to quit.  For me, personally, this looks like Mythic did make an attempt to fix an issue that existed in DAoC's RvR, but they really misread what people really wanted.

Hindenburg
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1854

Itto


Reply #37 on: April 07, 2009, 06:22:00 AM

If what they said is true, the losing side will start getting npc's and buffs until it can push the enemies out.

I'm certain that they've got everything working flawlessly in that area.

"Who uses Outlook anyway?  People who get what they deserve, that's who." - Ard.
Threash
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7488


Reply #38 on: April 07, 2009, 08:04:55 AM

One of the biggest complaints about RvR has been that there are no consequences for letting the other side win, so there's no real reason to fight back.  Well, now we see the consequence, and it's pretty harsh, to the point where is demoralizes your playerbase and causes them to quit.  For me, personally, this looks like Mythic did make an attempt to fix an issue that existed in DAoC's RvR, but they really misread what people really wanted.

The problem isn't that there are consequences for letting the other side win, the problem is that if one side wins its because the other side has been extremely disadvantaged for a VERY LONG TIME.  You are punishing them for being badly outnumbered, my server is the same way atm with order dominating tier 4 and having the run of our city virtually every day.  All it does is make the problem worse, who the fuck would roll order on that server now? why would the current order players stick around? 

I am the .00000001428%
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7355


Reply #39 on: April 07, 2009, 08:29:52 AM

People need to realize that open world faction pvp is NEVER fun. Oh it's tons of fun on paper and in some instances you can have a blast but it always ends up with one side having a huge advantage due to numbers and hurts the overall game.  For every person that likes world pvp there are a dozen who don't want to be arsed with it.

Imagine playing any multiplayer fps where it was always 10v5 and you get the idea. Adding buffs to one side doesn't work either because no matter how much damage or hp you can do, if you get swamped by opposing players you will lose.

There's a point where games ca't be realistic because quite frankly, real life isn't fair and if you are the wrong end it's not fun either. People pay for these games to have fun, no one on order was having fun that night.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #40 on: April 07, 2009, 09:31:20 AM

People need to realize that open world faction pvp is NEVER fun. Oh it's tons of fun on paper and in some instances you can have a blast but it always ends up with one side having a huge advantage due to numbers and hurts the overall game.  For every person that likes world pvp there are a dozen who don't want to be arsed with it.

Bullshit.  I had a ton of fun in DAoC world pvp despite its warts and problems.  For every dozen people who didn't want to be arsed with it, the majority just plain didn't like pvp regardless of how it was presented.  That's fine, but that's also not an indictment of world pvp specifically.

One of the biggest problems with world pvp in DAoC was certainly the realm imbalances, but Mythic made the problem that much worse when they cut down from three realms to two.  With three realms there's always the possibility of the two underdog realms ganging up on the strongest realm.  That happened a lot on my Hib server.  Of course, there's always the possibility that the two stronger realms beat up on the littlest realm.  That unfortunately happened a lot on my Alb server (Hi Ingmar & Sjofn!).  I always thought an interesting mechanic would be to force the two smaller realms to gang up on the bigger realm if the bigger realm past a certain threshold, simply by making the smaller realms neutral to each other if/when that threshold is past.  A dynamic like that at least has a chance at keeping one side from dominating too much, compared to the almost guaranteed fail of a two realm system.

Over and out.
Hindenburg
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1854

Itto


Reply #41 on: April 07, 2009, 09:39:25 AM

There's a point where games ca't be realistic because quite frankly, real life isn't fair and if you are the wrong end it's not fun either. People pay for these games to have fun, no one on order was having fun that night.

Shit man, can't you see? That defeat will make Order group up and fight harder than ever due to realm pride!

"Who uses Outlook anyway?  People who get what they deserve, that's who." - Ard.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7355


Reply #42 on: April 07, 2009, 09:49:12 AM

People need to realize that open world faction pvp is NEVER fun. Oh it's tons of fun on paper and in some instances you can have a blast but it always ends up with one side having a huge advantage due to numbers and hurts the overall game.  For every person that likes world pvp there are a dozen who don't want to be arsed with it.

Bullshit.  I had a ton of fun in DAoC world pvp despite its warts and problems.  For every dozen people who didn't want to be arsed with it, the majority just plain didn't like pvp regardless of how it was presented.  That's fine, but that's also not an indictment of world pvp specifically.

One of the biggest problems with world pvp in DAoC was certainly the realm imbalances, but Mythic made the problem that much worse when they cut down from three realms to two.  With three realms there's always the possibility of the two underdog realms ganging up on the strongest realm.  That happened a lot on my Hib server.  Of course, there's always the possibility that the two stronger realms beat up on the littlest realm.  That unfortunately happened a lot on my Alb server (Hi Ingmar & Sjofn!).  I always thought an interesting mechanic would be to force the two smaller realms to gang up on the bigger realm if the bigger realm past a certain threshold, simply by making the smaller realms neutral to each other if/when that threshold is past.  A dynamic like that at least has a chance at keeping one side from dominating too much, compared to the almost guaranteed fail of a two realm system.

And Daoc was such a smashing success wasn't it? Yes, like I just said some people will have fun but it pisses more people off than it entices. Sure if you want a niche game with world pvp there's a market but you won't be breaking 500k subs with it.  I think a lot of people like the idea of pvp, of player versus player combat but only when it's fair and balanced

As soon as you introduce things like gear cockblocks you lose some people, then introduce world pvp where one side nearly always has a numbers advantage and you lose more people. What companies end up being left with is you and you are not enough to make them a success in today's market.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Mavor
Terracotta Army
Posts: 58


Reply #43 on: April 07, 2009, 10:03:33 AM

There's a point where games ca't be realistic because quite frankly, real life isn't fair and if you are the wrong end it's not fun either. People pay for these games to have fun, no one on order was having fun that night.

Shit man, can't you see? That defeat will make Order group up and fight harder than ever due to realm pride!

 Realm pride?Huh   .. Honestly the type of people playing this game do NOT care about "realm pride". Even on the RP server.

 Imagine DAOC with the Alb zerg vs Mid with no hibs around to ally against the albs... That's whats happening on many servers right now.

 It's like playing a stacked game of team fortress 2 where the other team has 3 more players AND have +15% damage AND have a higher skill level. You know what happens then? People leave the game.

 Unfortunatly, the huge grind and lack of ability to switch realms means... they quit for good!
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #44 on: April 07, 2009, 10:11:15 AM

And Daoc was such a smashing success wasn't it? Yes, like I just said some people will have fun but it pisses more people off than it entices. Sure if you want a niche game with world pvp there's a market but you won't be breaking 500k subs with it.  I think a lot of people like the idea of pvp, of player versus player combat but only when it's fair and balanced

As soon as you introduce things like gear cockblocks you lose some people, then introduce world pvp where one side nearly always has a numbers advantage and you lose more people. What companies end up being left with is you and you are not enough to make them a success in today's market.

For its time, yes DAoC was a success.  WoW changed the metric of what's considered a 'success' today, but they had the advantage of drawing in all their Warcraft and Diablo fans.  That they also provided by far the most polished PvE experience also didn't hurt.

It should also be noted that for a long time (until ToA), DAoC pvp was largely gear non-dependent.  But yes, gear cockblocks are a problem.  Mythic was pretty stupid to introduce that into their games.  You'd think they'd have learned their lesson with ToA.  Population imbalance was always the biggest problem in DAoC RvR, but there were better ways for Mythic to address that than the way they did.

If you think world pvp is the problem, then let me show you WoW's arenas.  Their idea of 'sport pvp' is some of the worst pvp I've ever seen.  In my experience, the not always fair and balanced BGs are much more popular.

World PvP isn't a problem in and of itself.  Mythic just made pretty much all the wrong choices in how to go about implementing it in WAR.

Over and out.
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 14058

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #45 on: April 07, 2009, 10:18:44 AM


Shit man, can't you see? That defeat will make Order group up and fight harder than ever due to realm pride!

 Realm pride?Huh   .. Honestly the type of people playing this game do NOT care about "realm pride". Even on the RP server.



-Rasix
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7355


Reply #46 on: April 07, 2009, 10:21:10 AM

Wow expanded the market and there's no doubt of that but daoc never took the #1 slot and I'm pretty sure the decline for that game was fairly rapid as well.

Wow pvp is a horrible example because it's bad, very bad. Wow was designed as a pve game and trying to balance that with pvp as well was simply a horrible idea. That's sort of my point though, if you want fair pvp, player versus player combat that people will enjoy and come back to, you need it where they feel themselves on equal footing with their opponent and that just isn't going to happen in any diku mmo.

I'm not saying just toss out all pvp in games like these but it needs to be kept either unimportant and a fun side thing like battlegrounds/scenario's or the entire game needs to be focused around it with strict controls on populations/gear.  Neither wow nor war does the latter and while wow does have 'some' enjoyable pvp it's still just a side dish at best.

In game right now more people complain about wow pvp than applaud it(thats mostly dk's and paladins) but in wow there's other stuff to do and the main focus of their playerbase is pve oriented even on pvp servers.

 In warhammer they're just proper fucked.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17034


Reply #47 on: April 07, 2009, 10:31:53 AM

It should also be noted that for a long time (until ToA), DAoC pvp was largely gear non-dependent.  

I disagree with this point.  ToA made gear a much bigger factor in pvp than pre-ToA did.  Pre-ToA people had little to work with and often you saw people running around with little more than epic gear, a few crafted, and a couple quest items.  It was post ToA that gear had more to do with pvp outcomes. 

I don't know how exactly Mythic missed the boat.  They had a fun rvr system in DAoC where you could destroy towers, climb walls, and fight for a dungeon.  NONE of this made it into WAR.  It's like they took the worst and most broken aspects of DAoC (PvE, Static keep seiges, lots of cc, class imbalance) and made it even worse.  I don't really know how they could look at 6 years of past history and just toss it aside.  It's not that I wanted WAR to be DAoC v2.0, it's that I had hoped that they would learn from 6 years of screw ups.  It seems the only thing they got right was Tier 1 (pseudo Thidranki) and PQ's. 

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

-  Mark Twain
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 14058

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #48 on: April 07, 2009, 10:34:39 AM

Not to play Captain Obvious, forum defender again but.. you didn't disagree with him there.

-Rasix
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17034


Reply #49 on: April 07, 2009, 10:36:05 AM

Not to play Captain Obvious, forum defender again but.. you didn't disagree with him there.

Damnit.  I missed the non. 

My mistake. 

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

-  Mark Twain
Morfiend
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6009

wants a greif tittle


Reply #50 on: April 07, 2009, 10:36:20 AM

I think we have reached the point that just about every Warhammer Online thread reaches. Its kind of funny that they all end up in this same place.
Rasix
Moderator
Posts: 14058

I am the harbinger of your doom!


Reply #51 on: April 07, 2009, 10:38:09 AM

All roads lead to "Mythic fucked up and didn't learn a damn thing from DAoC".

-Rasix
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #52 on: April 07, 2009, 10:38:16 AM

I'm not saying just toss out all pvp in games like these but it needs to be kept either unimportant and a fun side thing like battlegrounds/scenario's or the entire game needs to be focused around it with strict controls on populations/gear.  Neither wow nor war does the latter and while wow does have 'some' enjoyable pvp it's still just a side dish at best.

In game right now more people complain about wow pvp than applaud it(thats mostly dk's and paladins) but in wow there's other stuff to do and the main focus of their playerbase is pve oriented even on pvp servers.

 In warhammer they're just proper fucked.

WAR is just a bad game.  You can't draw many conclusions from bad game design.  PVE being more popular than PVP has been said for years, but more people play on a WoW PVP server than a PVE server (or did last time I checked), but you can't really draw many conclusions from WoW either because although it's a good game, it's not a good PVP game.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 54097


WWW
Reply #53 on: April 07, 2009, 10:41:43 AM

All roads lead to "Mythic fucked up and didn't learn a damn thing from DAoC".
Increase exp gain!

I ask so little and get so much less.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17034


Reply #54 on: April 07, 2009, 10:41:48 AM

I think WAR is an example of how missing the mark by a small margin still makes for a bad game.  Tabula Rasa suffered the same fate.  So did AoC... but it's at least making a comeback.  

I really don't think WAR is off by a lot.  They're just unwilling to move in a direction that will help.  They're too focused on catering to the hardcore because keeping what they have appears a safer gamble than making a major change.  Maybe NGE scared off a few people from the "let's make a radical change" camp.  

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

-  Mark Twain
Shatter
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1407


Reply #55 on: April 07, 2009, 10:44:03 AM

 What makes PvP in WOW do well is that if you want it you got it.  Its always there and if you have 20 minutes and want to PvP you can do just that.  Hey I got time before the raid, Ill go do a quick AB.  It also does well because its a nice distraction from PvE, a break as it were.  However the whole idea of PvP in WOW is pointless and repetitive.  You're not fighting for your side, you do it for gear and tokens.  
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 37195

Prevent all damage that would be dealt to you and other troops you control.


WWW
Reply #56 on: April 07, 2009, 10:51:35 AM

There's a point where games ca't be realistic because quite frankly, real life isn't fair and if you are the wrong end it's not fun either. People pay for these games to have fun, no one on order was having fun that night.

What the people who want games to be more realistic don't realize is that historical, REAL war wasn't fought by two sides that were even close to equal. The whole point of tactics and strategy is to make it as easy as possible to achieve a favorable outcome for your side. Most battles weren't fought between even remotely equal sides. The zerg rush WAS the best strategy, because if you could get 15x more troops than your opponent, it didn't matter how good they were on an individual basis. You don't want realistic warfare in PVP games, you want both sides to have a chance to win and a chance to recover.

Hell, even PLAY2CRUSH Shadowbane resets the server when one side gets too powerful.

Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #57 on: April 07, 2009, 11:01:17 AM

Wow expanded the market and there's no doubt of that but daoc never took the #1 slot and I'm pretty sure the decline for that game was fairly rapid as well.

It took a couple years for DAOC to hit its decline phase, and WTF, now a game has to be #1 to be a success?

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Lakov_Sanite
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7355


Reply #58 on: April 07, 2009, 11:07:27 AM

Wow expanded the market and there's no doubt of that but daoc never took the #1 slot and I'm pretty sure the decline for that game was fairly rapid as well.

It took a couple years for DAOC to hit its decline phase, and WTF, now a game has to be #1 to be a success?

EQ was several years old when daoc came out if I remember right and there wasn't much competition out there. Of course a game doesn't need to be number one to be a success but Daoc failed to upset even an aging diku.  I also want to add I don't feel wow so much expanded the market as tapped into it. I think even during the eq days there was a bigger market than they knew but the games were just too niche and catassy to tap into it. Daoc's biggest failing in garnering more subscribers than they could, being in my opinion the pvp-centric nature of it.

Again though with the caveat that there's nothing wrong with a game being under 500k or even 100k subs, just don't expect more with focus on an imbalanced pvp system.

Also, HaemishM said exactly what I was thinking in better words.

~a horrific, dark simulacrum that glares balefully at us, with evil intent.
Nefar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 9


WWW
Reply #59 on: April 07, 2009, 11:12:03 AM

All roads lead to "Mythic fucked up and didn't learn a damn thing from DAoC".


I was saying the same mantra. However, the more I thought about it Ive come to the conclusion that Mythic didn't take much from what they learned from DAOC because they were too concerned on how they could entice WOW player base over to their side.  Just look at the design of the battlegrounds, there is no way they can tell me those were not designed to entice the chase your tail PVP style of WOW.  This was supposed to be a siege game, one focused on RVR, but instead what we ended up with is the best XP and RP gains in BGs which appeal to the WOW type PVP player base.   Coincidence, I think not. The battlegrounds should have been designed similar to DAOC style which leads players into "how to siege" not capture a damn flag.   Leave the flags where they belong, in a FPS game. 

WoW in my opinion has ruined the MMO market because instead of designers actually giving a damn about creating a new gaming experience they care about how they can pull those millions of customers from blizzard.  I personally would of much rather of had EA/Mythic take their new graphics and overlay them on DAOC classic servers then of created this hunk of garbage. 
Lantyssa
Terracotta Army
Posts: 20848


Reply #60 on: April 07, 2009, 11:12:21 AM

I really don't think WAR is off by a lot.  They're just unwilling to move in a direction that will help.  They're too focused on catering to the hardcore because keeping what they have appears a safer gamble than making a major change.  Maybe NGE scared off a few people from the "let's make a radical change" camp. 
Radical changes do have a high chance of tanking a game.

WAR doesn't need big changes.  It does need to stop making stupid ones though.  And to fire Barnett.  I'm leery of giving them money while he's still on the payroll.

Hahahaha!  I'm really good at this!
rk47
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6111

The Patron Saint of Radicalthons


Reply #61 on: April 07, 2009, 11:13:35 AM

I think WAR is an example of how missing the mark by a small margin still makes for a bad game.  Tabula Rasa suffered the same fate.  So did AoC... but it's at least making a comeback.  

I really don't think WAR is off by a lot.  They're just unwilling to move in a direction that will help.  They're too focused on catering to the hardcore because keeping what they have appears a safer gamble than making a major change.  Maybe NGE scared off a few people from the "let's make a radical change" camp.  

How are these changes 'radical'?
1. Lower EXP Requirement.
2. Remove Ward restrictions to end game content.

I find nothing hardcore about Warhammer gameplay or raiding, it was just a real grinding experience where even hitting 40 isn't enough to unlock the whole end game content which was supposedly focused on RVR. You still had to raid rinse repeat for set pieces so the capital city guards don't one shot you from range.

I admit it's not going to make the game so much better, but at least more people would stay and explore the game more before giving up post T2 or simply got sick of the soulcrushing bash the keep door just to gear up. Their PVE sucks dick, yet they still implement more features that made it worse. They can't possibly blame the players for finding the game not good enough to stay subbed.


The following error or errors occurred while posting this message:
Warning - while you were typing 3 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.  <--- awesome, for real  Heartbreak

Colonel Sanders is back in my wallet
Delmania
Terracotta Army
Posts: 674


Reply #62 on: April 07, 2009, 11:16:39 AM

All roads lead to "Mythic fucked up and didn't learn a damn thing from DAoC".

I disagree, Mythic learned quite a bit from DAoC.  What they didn't learn is that giving people exactly what they want it a really bad idea.

What the people who want games to be more realistic don't realize is that historical, REAL war wasn't fought by two sides that were even close to equal. The whole point of tactics and strategy is to make it as easy as possible to achieve a favorable outcome for your side. Most battles weren't fought between even remotely equal sides. The zerg rush WAS the best strategy, because if you could get 15x more troops than your opponent, it didn't matter how good they were on an individual basis. You don't want realistic warfare in PVP games, you want both sides to have a chance to win and a chance to recover.

Hell, even PLAY2CRUSH Shadowbane resets the server when one side gets too powerful.

Right, the fact that games don't have any real form of permadeath renders tactics a moot point.

Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #63 on: April 07, 2009, 11:26:55 AM

Wow expanded the market and there's no doubt of that but daoc never took the #1 slot and I'm pretty sure the decline for that game was fairly rapid as well.

It took a couple years for DAOC to hit its decline phase, and WTF, now a game has to be #1 to be a success?

EQ was several years old when daoc came out if I remember right and there wasn't much competition out there. Of course a game doesn't need to be number one to be a success but Daoc failed to upset even an aging diku.  I also want to add I don't feel wow so much expanded the market as tapped into it. I think even during the eq days there was a bigger market than they knew but the games were just too niche and catassy to tap into it. Daoc's biggest failing in garnering more subscribers than they could, being in my opinion the pvp-centric nature of it.


I think you have exactly wrong what kept DAOC from bigger success. It wasn't DAOC's PVP that was the problem. It was the PVE, even pre-expansions. It was grindy and boring. I guarantee that stopped more players from playing than anything PVP-related.

As for competition, there was EQ, UO, AC, AO, and a whole series of games that were supposed to be "DAOC killers" - Shadowbane, SWG, Planetside, etc., etc., etc. None of them ever killed it until WoW came along. I'm sorry but this business about DAOC being a failure is and has always been utter nonsense. DAOC was a success and a notable one for its time. Where failure comes in is Mythic's failure to take DAOC and build a good modern MMO on that foundation.

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #64 on: April 07, 2009, 11:28:37 AM

Wow pvp is a horrible example because it's bad, very bad. Wow was designed as a pve game and trying to balance that with pvp as well was simply a horrible idea. That's sort of my point though, if you want fair pvp, player versus player combat that people will enjoy and come back to, you need it where they feel themselves on equal footing with their opponent and that just isn't going to happen in any diku mmo.

I think what it really boils down to is: What makes pvp 'fair'?  I would submit that the threshold for a majority of people is actually pretty low.  People want to think they have a good chance of winning any particular engagement.  That means that 1) one side can't easily overwhelm the other(s), 2)  players hate losing control of their characters and 3) the very fastest way to have players lose interest in your pvp is if they die extremely fast.

This isn't rocket science, but it's stunning how often developers get this stuff wrong.  I already talked about how Mythic fucked up point 1.  Point 2 is pretty easy: minimize CC as much as possible.  Point 3: if characters are dying in 5 seconds or less, even the 'squishy' ones, then you've failed in your pvp design because people will get frustrated and leave.  Blizzard fucked up points 2 and 3.  CoX did as well, but that game is even more comically a pve game with ham-fisted pvp forced onto it.  I don't know how badly Mythic did with points 2 and 3 but since they completely fucked up point 1, it doesn't really matter.  Guild Wars probably did the best on all 3 points and is easily the most fun, balance pvp I've experienced, but there's no world to it.  Note: the pvp in GW is fun in spite of the lack of a world, not because of.  I haven't really been following it, but I'm interested in seeing how GW2 shapes up.

Over and out.
Hindenburg
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1854

Itto


Reply #65 on: April 07, 2009, 11:28:56 AM

Right, the fact that games don't have any real form of permadeath renders tactics a moot point.
swamp poop


Imagine the patch where they finally decrease XP requirements to sane ammounts, that is, cut it to 25% of what is currently asked. The shitstorm would be epic.

"Who uses Outlook anyway?  People who get what they deserve, that's who." - Ard.
Ingmar
Terracotta Army
Posts: 19280

Auto Assault Affectionado


Reply #66 on: April 07, 2009, 11:34:06 AM

Shit, if they actually cut it by that much, even I'd probably give it another month.

The Transcendent One: AH... THE ROGUE CONSTRUCT.
Nordom: Sense of closure: imminent.
Nevermore
Terracotta Army
Posts: 4740


Reply #67 on: April 07, 2009, 11:36:45 AM

All roads lead to "Mythic fucked up and didn't learn a damn thing from DAoC".

I disagree, Mythic learned quite a bit from DAoC.  What they didn't learn is that giving people exactly what they want it a really bad idea.

The clearest example of this is WAR's whole 'attack the capital city' idea.  Players in DAoC begged to be able to break through the RvR zone gates and storm the opposing capital cities.  Mythic made this a central premise in WAR and we see how well that idea is working out.

Quote from: Ingmar
I think you have exactly wrong what kept DAOC from bigger success. It wasn't DAOC's PVP that was the problem. It was the PVE, even pre-expansions. It was grindy and boring. I guarantee that stopped more players from playing than anything PVP-related.

This.  It wasn't the PvP that stopped DAoC from overtaking EQ, it was the awful PvE and the enormous barrier to the endgame it provided.

Over and out.
Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17034


Reply #68 on: April 07, 2009, 11:44:20 AM

How are these changes 'radical'?
1. Lower EXP Requirement.
2. Remove Ward restrictions to end game content.

I wasn't suggesting WAR needed radical changes, that's why I say that it didn't miss the mark by much.  I was just using NGE as an example of what Lantyssa supported. 

WAR needs some solid foundational changes though.  The addition of "mythic seconds" to cast times and the effects of lag jumping to exploit geometry are among them. 

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

-  Mark Twain
Delmania
Terracotta Army
Posts: 674


Reply #69 on: April 07, 2009, 11:47:21 AM

swamp poop

Wut?  A small force can take out a large force by hitting them in strategic points to disable their support and break morale.  In WAR the only thing it does is cause the people to respawn at the warcamp and call more people in and also get the zerg to roflstomp you.  The only reason crap like that worked in DAoC was because of the CC and time it took to get back to a fight.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  Warhammer Online (Moderator: tazelbain)  |  Topic: Warhammer completed  
Jump to:  

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