End of Nations (MMORTS)

[Malakili]

How can an mmorts be a competitive rts at the same time??   

Anything can be competitive. People compete over which raindrop dribbles down the window first.

Thats not the point though.  Competitive in this context means teams or people facing off against each other on basically equal ground.  As opposed to an open PvP system/war in which the sides might not be equal at all.  Yes you can argue that both sides are still "competing" but the point is you can't really play a football game if you just say, allright whoever shows for both teams is playing, and you end up 5 v. 9. 



Also DLRiley: Shattered Galaxy http://www.sgalaxy.com/

[Stabs]

What SG?

Shattered Galaxy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shattered_Galaxy

How can an mmorts be a competitive rts at the same time??   

Anything can be competitive. People compete over which raindrop dribbles down the window first.

Thats not the point though.  Competitive in this context means teams or people facing off against each other on basically equal ground.  As opposed to an open PvP system/war in which the sides might not be equal at all.  Yes you can argue that both sides are still "competing" but the point is you can't really play a football game if you just say, allright whoever shows for both teams is playing, and you end up 5 v. 9. 



Also DLRiley: Shattered Galaxy http://www.sgalaxy.com/

Asymmetric competition is certainly possible. Eve is an asymmetric but highly competitive territorial conflict game.

Maybe there's some clever system for managing different size populations with handicapping of some such. You might not be able to play football 5 v 9 (although we certainly played 3 v 4 when I was a kid) but you could probably play golf if you measured team averages against each other.

[Malakili]

Asymmetric competition is certainly possible. Eve is an asymmetric but highly competitive territorial conflict game.

Maybe there's some clever system for managing different size populations with handicapping of some such. You might not be able to play football 5 v 9 (although we certainly played 3 v 4 when I was a kid) but you could probably play golf if you measured team averages against each other.

I just mean to say that to me competitive means things like tournaments, ladders, etc. Stuff like www.teamwarfare.com  www.gomtv.net  www.mlg.com www.cevo.com, or even just something like Blizzard's SC2 ladder. Territorial conflict doesn't particularly seem to fit that bill for me.  If you ARE going to focus on competitive games, it doesn't strike me that making the game an MMO is the best choice.

[Lantyssa]

Don't really understand why they are trying to push that kind of competitive format in this game.  SC2 has it all wrapped up.

Maybe because not everyone gives a flip about SC2?

Should all game studios close down and let Blizzard own all the genres?

[DLRiley]

If it will stop games like SWTOR from being made yes 

[Malakili]

Don't really understand why they are trying to push that kind of competitive format in this game.  SC2 has it all wrapped up.

Maybe because not everyone gives a flip about SC2?

Should all game studios close down and let Blizzard own all the genres?

Competitive RTS is pretty specific.  I'm not saying they shouldn't make an RTS, but it does seem silly to try and implement a system that would be in competition with something like SC2 when they are building a game that on the surface seems like it would be appealing to RTS players for being fundamentally different than SC2.

[DLRiley]

We can argue that the game at its core is pve oriented, but if the gameplay is fun/balanced enough it would be a shame if there wasn't any competitive pvp. Again SC2 hasn't cornered the competitive rts market. BattleForge would have been huge if it didn't insist on being a cash grab. As long as it doesn't throw the gameplay under the RPG/Cash shop bus than it will do well.

[Stabs]

I just mean to say that to me competitive means things like tournaments, ladders, etc.

Well good luck convincing the rest of the industry to adopt your definition while there are marketing departments telling them to put the word competitive on the box because it makes the game sell more.

[DLRiley]

Your confusing competitive with mmo.

[Malakili]

I just mean to say that to me competitive means things like tournaments, ladders, etc.

Well good luck convincing the rest of the industry to adopt your definition while there are marketing departments telling them to put the word competitive on the box because it makes the game sell more.

I don't really care about what word we use.  The point is, putting in a gameplay type which competes directly with a another game which is undoubtedly going to do it better seems like a waste of time.  ESPECIALLY demoing it at a convention and ESPECIALLY when that part of the game you are demoing isn't even the unique/interesting part of your game that actually separates it from your competition, which is the aforementioned PvE stuff.

Oh well, I'm just bitter this game ended up looking like such a joke, I thought it had a ton of potential.

[Draegan]

Oh well, I'm just bitter this game ended up looking like such a joke, I thought it had a ton of potential.

Have we seen anything that would lead us to any opinion of it?

[Speedy Cerviche]

So wait? There's no territorial conquest map like in Shattered Galaxy? It's just co-op PvE?

[DLRiley]

Malakili you PLAY starcraft 2, you YOURSELF know that it doesn't fill everyone cup of tea. Its the only thing available that is balanced in a market of command & conquer, supreme commander, and DoW2. it doesn't have to be on gomtv to have enjoyable pvp with even matches. The bar isn't that high.

[Mrbloodworth]

So wait? There's no territorial conquest map like in Shattered Galaxy? It's just co-op PvE?

..............


http://www.endofnations.com/en/game/faq

I'm confused, the video seemed to suggest 1 big NPC faction and 2 different Player factions both hating the NPC faction (not 100% sure the player factions fight each other as well, but assume yes).  But quite possible I've got it all wrong.

You are correct. 1 NPC, and 2 playable. I suppose my confusion was early talks indicated that player-factions would be available, however I believe I was just mistaken, as they are simply "clans" or whatever term they want to use.

[Speedy Cerviche]

oh ok, got confused.

Going to echo what some others have said, that 2 factions seems like a bad idea. A lot more difficult to dominate with 3 or 4.

[DLRiley]

15, 8, 4. easy to balance.

[Stabs]

I'm not sure most players will care about their faction winning. If I were to play single player doesn't matter to me if some leader board somewhere says the green people are doing worse than the purple people. I'll pick my side because the units tech and lore look interesting.

If I'm 1v1 I'll pick what I think gives me the best chance to win. If zergling rush wins for me I'll always pick zerg even if they are losing 10 000 point to 10. Again I care about my 1v1 experience not some leader board somewhere.

Maybe as we get more details it will become clearer why players might care about their factions.

[Malakili]

Malakili you PLAY starcraft 2, you YOURSELF know that it doesn't fill everyone cup of tea. Its the only thing available that is balanced in a market of command & conquer, supreme commander, and DoW2. it doesn't have to be on gomtv to have enjoyable pvp with even matches. The bar isn't that high.

I'm not saying SC2 is everyone's cup of tea.  I just think that it IS pretty much everyone who wants a competitive RTS game's cup of tea.  Again, this may be a definitional issue of competitive.  If there is a market for an MMORTS, it doesn't strike me that its going to poach loads of players from SC2.

Oh well, I'm just bitter this game ended up looking like such a joke, I thought it had a ton of potential.

Have we seen anything that would lead us to any opinion of it?

Yes and no.  On the one hand, like I've said, I have a fairly poor idea of what its going to be like to log in and play.  On the other hand, they have been really pushing the co-op/diku stuff from the beginning.  Do missions! Kill bosses! Get loot!  The PvP stuff seems like at best a global agenda type thing and at worst a WAR type thing.  I guess my idea of an MMORTS just isn't in line with what other people want.  When I first heard about this, I had visions in my head of Planetside or World War 2 Online + RTS.   Every bit of information we've gotten has gotten further and further from that and in the end it seems as much an RPG as an RTS.

[Lantyssa]

Does SC2 allow matches with 50 players?  No?  Then it offers something different.

[Mrbloodworth]

It also reads like this game is more the Dawn of war/CoH style of less, smarter units, than the SC2/Supreme commander, hordes of units style RTS.

[Malakili]

Does SC2 allow matches with 50 players?  No?  Then it offers something different.

I'm not saying that it is no different from SC2, I'm saying that insofar that it is different, they don't seem to be leveraging those differences very well in terms of marketing their game, and throwing words around like "competitive" seems to be aimed at a crowd that isn't going to switch over to their game.

I'm interested in what a 50 person match is like, and I'm interested in how that related to the territory control meta game, but I can't imagine how they can do it a way that is particularly "competitive."

It also reads like this game is more the Dawn of war/CoH style of less, smarter units, than the SC2/Supreme commander, hordes of units style RTS.

Along with this is the fact that macro seems effectively eliminated as well.  The focus seems totally on unit control.  I don't really have a judgement on that either way, but its worth mentioning that it seems like you won't really build much in battle.  There have been some murmurings of bunkers or other defensive structures, but you aren't going to need to crank out rounds of tanks or whatever constantly (even with a small unit supply cap which would give a similar outcome to what you've mentioned).

[Mrbloodworth]

Yeah, but I prefer the DoW/CoH style. Personally.

I think some of you may be confusing or misreading competitive as "E-sport".

[Malakili]

Yeah, but I prefer the DoW/CoH style. Personally.

I think some of you may be confusing or misreading competitive as "E-sport".

I'd use the terms interchangably.

[Ghambit]

Literally the only truly "competitive"  MMORTS out there is BattleForge, then maybe Mytheon (if anyone played it).  BF enjoyed some early success, but faceplanted for the most part.  Then we get into the debate of if they were even really MMOs to begin with, which they werent.  They were more like mission oriented LoL/DOTA or lobbied DoW.  BF was from the get-go was designed around collectible competition ala MtG.

I believe Malakili's disappointment is that dev. is looking to be more on the side of the games I just cited.  Rather than being something like 50-man DoW with a superior over-arching strat. meta or top-down PS or WW2O.  Really, it's just looking more like BattleForge with more people playing simultaneously at the expense of unit amounts.

I still kinda dont know even to really judge one way or another.  This design confuses me.

[Amaron]

I think some of you may be confusing or misreading competitive as "E-sport".

I'd use the terms interchangably.

Competitive is just "I want to win to prove my penis is larger than yours".   You don't necessarily practice or join a team full of dickheads you hate in order to win.

[DLRiley]

All gaming is a form of dick measuring. As long as there is some way to keep score...

[Mrbloodworth]

MMORPG.com:
What will End of Nations be showing at gamescom? Will we finally be seeing more the fabled PvP in this MMORTS?

David Luehmann:
Gamescom is a big event for Trion, and the biggest part of our presence will revolve around the next content reveal for End of Nations. We will be showing a new PvP map variation that pits teams of 8 players against each other in an epic clash. We will also be focusing on (or revealing) the End of Nations PvP Meta-game. In these matches, the winning faction takes control over a territory after a sequence of successful battles against the opposing side. After these battles take place, the territorial control will shift to the faction that is victorious with the overarching goal of world domination against the Order of Nations. Each day at Gamescom the demo stations on the floor will be fighting for control over three different sections of Australia.

MMORPG.com:
What else might gamers get a peek at during the event? Will all of the Commander classes be playable?

David Luehmann:
We will be hosting live demos, PvP tournaments and a fan event on Saturday night so attendees will have a great opportunity to get full access to EON during Gamescom.

MMORPG.com:
How close are we to a wide-scale beta test? We're all getting just a tiny bit anxious for End of Nations to start making noise.

David Luehmann:
We're deep into the development process and the game is coming along spectacularly, but we don't have any news to share on a launch timeframe for End of Nations. You can expect to see a lot more exciting reveals in the near future!

[Mrbloodworth]

End of Nations to be free-to-play

Conquering the world just got a lot more affordable, as Trion Worlds announced that its MMORTS End of Nations will be released as a top-notch free-to-play title. This decision means that players can not only obtain a copy of the client for free, but play through the solo, co-op, and the persistent-world multiplayer conquest modes as well.

Trion's Dave Luehmann hopes this will give End of Nations a competitive advantage when it launches: "Being able to offer a premium game such as End of Nations for free sets us apart in this industry. At Trion, we strive to innovate online gaming while emphasizing the delivery of the best core gameplay experience available. Our decision to release End of Nations as a AAA free–to-play title is guided by these principles."

Trion will be offering an optional subscription package and a game store to enhance players' experience. The store will sell customization and convenience items, and Trion has clearly stated that it will not be selling "pay-to-win items" through it.

During our hands-on impressions from last year, we noted that the title was probably not best suited for a monthly subscription, so it's good to see Trion freeing the game from that business model. End of Nations will be available to players at this month's Gamescom.

[Malakili]

Well, I'll definitely give it a shot at the low price of free.

[Draegan]

GamesCom 2011 Trailer

If you don't mind a bit of self promotion.  Couple of screen caps here from the GamesCom trailer.

I liked the world map, it's like a Risk board.

Large Image:

Aaaaaaand Beta Signups: http://www.endofnations.com/en/community/newsletter.php

Aaaaaaand F2P FAQ: http://www.endofnations.com/en/game/free-to-play

[Malakili]

Tried to watch some gameplay videos on youtube and it looks ok.  I really want to see someone good at it play.  I still don't get a good sense of the gameplay from anything I've seen.  It looks a little slow paced, but that is ok in theory.

[Malakili]

Looks like you sign up for beta by signing up for the newsletter: http://www.endofnations.com/en/community/newsletter

I'm thinking I have a good chance since I got a code from a convention last year that should secure me a spot when it starts, but it looks like there will be an NDA, so I won't be able to give reports.

[jakonovski]

I just hope the twitch ceiling is suitably low in this game and the gameplay depth is achieved through something cerebral. My mouse hand can't compete anymore.

[Malakili]

I just hope the twitch ceiling is suitably low in this game and the gameplay depth is achieved through something cerebral. My mouse hand can't compete anymore.

It doesn't look particularly micro intensive.

[Draegan]

There doesn't seem to be any resource gathering our base building.  Essentially you control your own squad and that's it.  Ill be able to see at pax.