Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
September 17, 2019, 04:21:48 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Search:     Advanced search
Donate! | Shop: Amazon
*
Home Help Search Login Register
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  World of Warcraft  |  Topic: WoW PVP Update 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: WoW PVP Update  (Read 12074 times)
Morfiend
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6009

wants a greif tittle


on: July 11, 2004, 03:13:10 PM

Here are some of the things that the dev team are working on right now for PVP in WoW.

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?FN=wow-pvp&T=3115&P=1&ReplyCount=55#post3115

Quote
PvP Balance:
- Priests are at the top of our list of classes with balance problems. This is a complex issue that includes Holy Word:Shield, general HPS versus DPS, and lots of instant cast offense and defense (note: this isn't meant to imply that the rest of the classes are perfectly balanced).
- General prevalence of instant cast spells/abilties. While we like having a reasonable amount of instant cast, we are investigating whether they're simply too prevalent. We certainly don't want PvP to be "instant-cast only", or nearly so.
- Prevalence of crowd-control and root/snare. Right now there is too much of this stuff. We'll address this issue at least in part in this push with dimishing returns in PvP for some of these spells. More improvements to come later...
- Levels are too impactful in PvP. Right now, levels mean too much in PvP. We'll be altering the way in which character level factors into various calculations for PvP so as to make level differences much more forgiving.
- Prevalence of tracking.
- Channeling spells being too hard to use effectively.
- Engineering skill balance (along with miscellaneous trade skill issues).


PvP System Issues:
- Lack of a death penalty (we're taking a first step in this push, with a really simple time-out for pvp deaths, refinement to come later).
- Lack of reason to PvP other then "for the heck of it". Reward systems, quests, etc are being designed and implemented to address this.
- Grief-able NPCs. The town guard system is being iterated on and improved considerably. In addition, some NPCs will recieve appropriate increases in level/abilities.


I really like making levels mean less. We will see.
ajax34i
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2508


Reply #1 on: July 11, 2004, 04:14:09 PM

My opinion is that some of the "balancing" will require drastic changes to core gameplay.  I don't understand why they didn't keep some of these things in mind when they originally designed the game.  Perhaps "PvP tuning" is a good excuse that lets them incorporate the latest and best features of other games out there now.

My other concern is that with all this coverage, after reading about WoW for a year or whatever, when the game finally gets released I'll feel like I've already played it, and won't bother.
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #2 on: July 11, 2004, 05:49:34 PM

The most important point is about providing reasons to fight.

Then it's valuable that they see instants, root spells and levels differences as problems. Still way faster than Mythic at realizing basic problems. I couldn't desire more.

As I said, it's not the dream-game but is way above everything already on the market. By far.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #3 on: July 11, 2004, 05:59:00 PM

You can always make the same spells work somewhat differently in PvP and PvE. For example a spell that roots an enemy for 30 seconds might root another player for 5...you can come up with some hokey explanation. I think that is a better solution than expecting the exact same stuff to work in PvE and PvP.

The difference is in PvP, everyone has to be having fun. In PvE, only the players have to be having fun. The goblin getting wailed on can't complain.

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #4 on: July 11, 2004, 07:06:36 PM

If I didn't know this thread was about WoW, I would have thought someone dug up a three year old DAoC one. That feature list is almost precisely the same as half the stuff I read prior to and following launch. I'd expect Blizzard of all people to be able to learn from the challenges of their forebears, particularly since they seem to have no problem recognizing good things to rip off from them :) (and yes, as their forebears ripped off from others...)

What do you WoW player folks think? Is WoW a game that can actually have good integrated PvP? All along I've seen a hugely-quest-based fun RPG with stats and EQ everywhere. Recently though (at least as far as I've seen) is this push to integrate PvP. But just like in EQ, and DAoC early on, it feels like a force-fit, an attempt to increase their already astronomically-estimated accountbase another 2-5%.

Anyway, is Blizzard doomed to toss a crapload of resources at something so often proved to be enjoyable by a statistically irrelevant number of players? Or are they just a few tweaks away from doing right what so many others have not?
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #5 on: July 11, 2004, 08:31:10 PM

A PvP system relies completely on the structure. Right now there's no structure since there's no purpose or reward (aside griefing by killing NPCs).

For now Blizzard fixed two issues of DAoC: balance and interrupts.

For the rest we have to wait. I play exclusively on the PvP server but still at level 14 and I've never seen anything PvP-related. Anyway, I like the fact that the PvP happens in the real world and not on a special zone.

If Blizzard attaches a conquest system *inside* the actual world they'll have a damn wonderful system.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
Riggswolfe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7007


Reply #6 on: July 11, 2004, 08:44:05 PM

Quote from: Morphiend


Quote
PvP Balance:
- Priests are at the top of our list of classes with balance problems. This is a complex issue that includes Holy Word:Shield, general HPS versus DPS, and lots of instant cast offense and defense (note: this isn't meant to imply that the rest of the classes are perfectly balanced).
- General prevalence of instant cast spells/abilties. While we like having a reasonable amount of instant cast, we are investigating whether they're simply too prevalent. We certainly don't want PvP to be "instant-cast only", or nearly so.


These kinds of things could make me leave WoW in a heartbeat. I love WoW as it stands, but if they start nerfing abilities so that the PvPers can have fun then I may just leave. Part of the reason I think most MMO's have such boring, slow gameplay is so that PvP isn't a fragfest.

I am truly getting to the point where I think the first decision that should be made when designing a game is:

Is this a PvE game or a PvP game?

I don't think the two can coexist. Even on seperate servers. Abilities that are fine in PvE aren't fine in PvP and so the nerf bat comes out. Pisses me off everytime and makes me want to find the PvP mother fuckers and kill each and every one of them.

"We live in a country, where John Lennon takes six bullets in the chest, Yoko Ono was standing right next to him and not one fucking bullet! Explain that to me! Explain that to me, God! Explain it to me, God!" - Denis Leary summing up my feelings about the nature of the universe.
angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #7 on: July 11, 2004, 08:48:39 PM

Quote
PvP System Issues:
- Lack of a death penalty (we're taking a first step in this push, with a really simple time-out for pvp deaths, refinement to come later).


Boy, nothing spells a good time like a PvP death penalty. WTF are these retards thinking? Why would anyone except griefers want a PvP death penalty. Even the subhumans who played EQ and thought it was fun couldn't want this shit.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Riggswolfe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7007


Reply #8 on: July 11, 2004, 09:00:38 PM

There are huge, and I mean, huge letters on the forums from PvP guilds and one of the number one things they request is a PvP death penalty.

::shrugs::

"We live in a country, where John Lennon takes six bullets in the chest, Yoko Ono was standing right next to him and not one fucking bullet! Explain that to me! Explain that to me, God! Explain it to me, God!" - Denis Leary summing up my feelings about the nature of the universe.
schild
Administrator
Posts: 58504


WWW
Reply #9 on: July 11, 2004, 09:18:12 PM

Quote
Why would anyone except griefers want a PvP death penalty.


Quote
There are huge, and I mean, huge letters on the forums from PvP guilds and one of the number one things they request is a PvP death penalty.
Venkman
Terracotta Army
Posts: 11536


Reply #10 on: July 11, 2004, 10:10:08 PM

I guess I'm still looking for an impression on just why there's any focus on PvP at all in Wow.

WoW stood the chance of being addictive but not requiring an EQ-level of addiction just to be competitive within the game. Now it sounds like they're going to focus on integrating a system that arguably hasn't ever been perfected. Worse, it's for a subset of players within a niche genre already with too much saturation.

I don't doubt Blizzard could make a compelling MMO PvP game. I do doubt it'd be as fun as PS, but it sounds like WoW PvP has the same problem as PS: not compelling enough for long enough for enough people to pay long enough. It happens.

Yet, it's happening in a PvE game at the expense of the PvE game. They should stick with what WoW wanted to always be. They could have made an EQ killer. Now I'm worrying they've set themselves to defeat games orders of magnitude less successful.

But I'm hoping I'm wrong. This is the first game I'm actively avoiding the beta on because I'd like a totally new experience. I just hope it doesn't become DAoC. I tried it again last week, 30 months after a quit. It took me all of 5 minutes to remember why I quit, and another 25 minutes before I realized how much time I shouldn't have spent hoping otherwise.
Morfiend
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6009

wants a greif tittle


Reply #11 on: July 11, 2004, 10:51:39 PM

Quote from: Darniaq
What do you WoW player folks think? Is WoW a game that can actually have good integrated PvP?


Well, I am playing on the PVP server also. Level 25 Undead Warrior. I have just started going to a little town called Hillsbrad. Now, for non-pvp players this is just another town to get a bunch of quests in. On the PVP server is is one of the biggest places where the Horde and Alliance clash. First, it is a fairly small zone and there are base camps for both the horde and alliance. What makes it a real drag is the quests, and now, lets see who can figure this out, and if it take your more than 10 seconds.

Horde quests in Hillsbrad start around lvl22 and go to around lvl28

Alliance quests start around lvl 28 and go to 38 or so.

Anyone see a problem with this? We have a highly contested zone, with quests in the same area. Needless to say, it is a slaughter.

I got killed more times today, when I started questing in Hillsbrad, than my entire time of playing WoW to date. Now, some times itsd a real drag to be soloing a quest at 25 and have 2 lvl 38+ alliance run up and kill me. But hey, its the PVP server and I know full well Hillsbrad would be nasty.

A few times I have had level "??" alliance characters (?? means they are more than 15 or 20 levels above you) come up to me, and salute me, and run off. Makes you actually have a slight glimmer of hope for the MMOG player. Untill 45 seconds later when 5 lvl 40+ come and kill you, then spam /taunt emotes at your body.

There are some problems with the Mage class right now in that they have so many options. Mages get HUGE damage spells, Roots, Stuns, and Invisibility. They are the PVP kiddie class of choice.

Also, being Undead I am immune to the Mages polymorph (used to be sleep) but the Paladin and Priest classes to special holy damage on undead, and have REALLY nasty undead holds and fears.

There are enough safe zones for lower levels to get going with out to much grief, but it IS war out there on the PVP server. And come release, I wouldnt have it any other way. Well, ill take that back. On the PVP forums there are a vocial minority yelling, and whining, and screaming for much harsher death penalties. Like item loot, and major exp loss. That is about the studidest thing they could do to a PVP server that is really fun, and the death penalty is light enough that you dont really mind dying all that much.

From what I have seen, the PVP will work, and it will be fun.
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #12 on: July 12, 2004, 12:44:45 AM

Quote from: Darniaq
They could have made an EQ killer.


They did already. What is important is the pace of the development *after* the release. WoW is already aimed to be an huge hit no matter what, they already achieved that status. But the real quality of the game in the long distance really depends on how much they'll be able to offer. Because the game will need to grow without having to wait for another five years for an expansion or a major patch.

They already got EQ and FFXI, now they are going after DAoC.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
angry.bob
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5442

We're no strangers to love. You know the rules and so do I.


Reply #13 on: July 12, 2004, 04:31:50 AM

Quote from: Riggswolfe
There are huge, and I mean, huge letters on the forums from PvP guilds and one of the number one things they request is a PvP death penalty.


Yes, and I recognize a lot of those guilds. And I wouldn’t trust them farther than I could reach out and physically punch them.

So now what exactly about a PvP death penalty is going to get the average player to engage in PvP? I can understand EQ players wanting it, but what about normal people? You know, those of us who aren’t repressed masochists too scared to admit we want a stern father figure to tie us up and probe our colon with a bottle brush while they tell us it’s “fun”. Which would be anyone who thinks EQ past level 30 is fun.

I ask again, what's the appeal to people besides mass gankers and griefers? 'Cause I'm just not seeing any. And if any of you are thinking of replying "It's more challenging that way", do me a favor and just call yourself "naive" or "f4g" - because you're one of the two.

Quote from: HRose
They already got EQ and FFXI, now they are going after DAoC.


Then to be honest, they’ll fail horribly at that. As marginal fan and player of DAoC, I can say there is literally nothing “better” or even as good in WoW as there is in DAoC when it comes to what DAoC players are looking for. A game that by all reports has de facto mandatory grouping and a death penalty in PvP is not going to steal the sort of people still playing DAoC. Heck, with the new engine in Catacombs, DAoC is even the best looking game coming out, if that’s where your interests lay. People may try WoW, but when they find out that it’s still tripping over it’s dick involving issues that DAoC solved years ago, they’re not going to be terribly forgiving.

As development of WoW rolls on and on, it looks more and more like a poorly planned clusterfuck cobbled together out of the worst parts of a lot of current games.

Wovon man nicht sprechen kann, darüber muß man schweigen.
Runnyb
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3


Reply #14 on: July 12, 2004, 05:20:51 AM

Quote
Then to be honest, they’ll fail horribly at that. As marginal fan and player of DAoC, I can say there is literally nothing “better” or even as good in WoW as there is in DAoC when it comes to what DAoC players are looking for. A game that by all reports has de facto mandatory grouping and a death penalty in PvP is not going to steal the sort of people still playing DAoC. Heck, with the new engine in Catacombs, DAoC is even the best looking game coming out, if that’s where your interests lay. People may try WoW, but when they find out that it’s still tripping over it’s dick involving issues that DAoC solved years ago, they’re not going to be terribly forgiving.


I completely agree, I only hope that this is because they are in beta atm, but it does not appear as if these issues will be adressed in the "near future".

It sure seems to me as if Blizzard has a shitload on their plate, and at the rate the patches are coming, WoW will either see a completely pre-mature release in December or we won't see retail until mid-late 2005.
Mesozoic
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1359


Reply #15 on: July 12, 2004, 05:59:03 AM

Grrrr.   Take a good PvE game.  Add PvP because "hey, why not."  Then develop the PvP game at the expense of the PvE, both in terms of developer time and game design.

It sounds like the WoW community is at the same place the DAoC community was when Mordred was being developed.  IE hardcore.

...any religion that rejects coffee worships a false god.
-Numtini
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #16 on: July 12, 2004, 06:01:45 AM

Quote from: angry.bob

So now what exactly about a PvP death penalty is going to get the average player to engage in PvP? I can understand EQ players wanting it, but what about normal people? You know, those of us who aren’t repressed masochists too scared to admit we want a stern father figure to tie us up and probe our colon with a bottle brush while they tell us it’s “fun”. Which would be anyone who thinks EQ past level 30 is fun.

I ask again, what's the appeal to people besides mass gankers and griefers? 'Cause I'm just not seeing any. And if any of you are thinking of replying "It's more challenging that way", do me a favor and just call yourself "naive" or "f4g" - because you're one of the two.


I think everyone is looking at a pvp death penalty the wrong way.  Instead it should be looked upon as a bonus for the victor in a pvp encounter.  There should be a reason to engage in pvp just as there is a level up result for pve.  The hardest part is to make the negative effects of dieing in pvp minor enough so as not to put the non-guilded player off while at the same time significant enough to keep the pvp guilds interested (Corpse runs are bad, item loss although I like it myself put a lot of people off, exp penalty is terrible, some type of forced time out would probably be best).  The bonus should be small because no matter what it is a small group of players/guilds will dominate pvp and that should be factored in.

When I first read about DAoC RVR, I liked the idea of the opposing sides not being able to communicate (that removes a lot of negative factors in pvp).  I also assumed there would be some kind of rare drops from the defeated, e.g. you kill a Dwarf player, search his corpse and maybe find a mithril token, a map of a mine or extremely rarely a dwarf crafted weapon, something that can add to the ecomony..  As the sides are not able to communicate the fact that the Dwarf was not actually carrying any of this stuff and it's been created from thin air as it is for mobs becomes less obvious.

This type of random drop system worked extremely well in AC for PVE, AC was the only game where I witnessed players continued to loot mobs well below their level for anything other that cash, as there was always a chance of a good rare drop even from something much lower level.

Quote from: angry.bob

As development of WoW rolls on and on, it looks more and more like a poorly planned clusterfuck cobbled together out of the worst parts of a lot of current games.


I totally agree with you here, I have been given access to a beta account by a friend and not even downloaded the client.  The problems with pvp listed are obvious to anyone who played DAoC as said above, just by reading the pve skills feature list, crowd control, instant cast spells powerful in pvp, who would have thought?  

Next they will discover that area effect spells are quite powerful, archers do well as range > melee etc etc, I don't even know if they have stealth users  in WOW but if they do I wouldn't like to be a stealth using character 3 months after release when the nerf bat hits.
daveNYC
Terracotta Army
Posts: 722


Reply #17 on: July 12, 2004, 08:33:24 AM

Quote from: Arthur_Parker
I think everyone is looking at a pvp death penalty the wrong way.  Instead it should be looked upon as a bonus for the victor in a pvp encounter.

If they want it to be a bonus for the victor, they can just have player corpses generate dwarf scalps and a little coin.  Anything that involves experience loss (or god forbid de-leveling) is just a kick in the balls for the loser, and provides no benefit, no bonus, for the victor.  Unless that victor gets his rocks off by kicking puppies.
Alluvian
Terracotta Army
Posts: 1205


WWW
Reply #18 on: July 12, 2004, 09:20:40 AM

In arthur's defense, he was meaning exp gain for the winner of course.  Common knowledge seems to be that you can't give one side exp without the other losing it or it is too exploitable.

Kill limits would help get around this, where killing the same person a third time nets no exp or something.

Cash rewards for the death unlimited won't work as they will clusterfuck the economy with half the people two boxing to kill their second account for endless monetary gain.  Again you can put a kill limit on this as a sort of fix.

Everyone seems to have a beta key that they are too cool to use.  Send them over here then.  My wife would love to play and I would not mind checking it out at all.

If the combat is fun it could be a good game.  If the combat isn't fun it will suck donkey balls.  Quests are nothing but excuses to get people to travel and fight things.  Travel is rarely fun after the first time, so the game will boil down to whether it is enjoyable to wack moles or not.

I like wacking them in CoH so far.  The quests enhance the combat, but without the good combat the quests themselves would just be grind.

[edited to add:]
Terribly written post, sorry about that.  Anyway, to clarify, I don't think the idea of pvp loss is a good idea in a level dominated game.  Hell, in any game really.  Even if the reason you are losing is because you suck, that sucky player will quit if they lose too much on death.  Why should anyone care?  Because the sucky player actually gives a positive game experience to the slightly less sucky player that kills him.

Just make the rewards limited so you can't gank the same person time and time again for significant gain.  Hell, you could have the server check credit card names and billing address before giving exp even.  If either match, no exp.
El Gallo
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2213


Reply #19 on: July 12, 2004, 09:29:31 AM

Quote
I guess I'm still looking for an impression on just why there's any focus on PvP at all in Wow.


They need PvP to justify their decision to divide the factions in the first place.  Divided factions makes zero gameplay sense in a PvE game.

Of course, the only reason they divided the factions was because that's what the lore suggests.  Making gameplay decisions subservient to lore considerations (especially when the lore was generated for a different genre of game) is stupid.

Really, they should have made the game based on the Diablo franchise rather than the WC franchise.  Then you have no need to divide the player base.  But DiabloOnline only gets you the Diablo+EQ+various EQLite games fanbase.  WoW gets you all those plus some Warcraft players.

Quote
it feels like a force-fit, an attempt to increase their already astronomically-estimated accountbase another 2-5%.


It does.  Though I suspect that Blizzard thinks that they can convert RTS players into MMOG PvPers, which is much more than a 2-5% increase.


That being said, they have noted on the boards that they will balance PvP by changing how spells/abilities work in PvP, and not changing how they work in PvE.  It still sucks enormous amounts of development time.  Considering how slowly Blizzard puts out content, and how quickly content gets chewed up in this genre, that is a big downside of PvP.

This post makes me want to squeeze into my badass red jeans.
Arthur_Parker
Terracotta Army
Posts: 5865

Internet Detective


Reply #20 on: July 12, 2004, 10:27:45 AM

Quote from: daveNYC

If they want it to be a bonus for the victor, they can just have player corpses generate dwarf scalps and a little coin.  Anything that involves experience loss (or god forbid de-leveling) is just a kick in the balls for the loser, and provides no benefit, no bonus, for the victor.  Unless that victor gets his rocks off by kicking puppies.


That's exactly what I was trying to say in my normal hamfisted manner, plus theres a lot more potential for logical and interesting item drops from enemy players.  

Though as Alluvian points out there would have to be some form of limit to the prevent farming with 2 accounts, maybe only generate an item for the victor upon death 5 times a day for each character, I guess that would be easier than trying to cross reference accounts to prevent it.

Quote from: Alluvian
Everyone seems to have a beta key that they are too cool to use. Send them over here then. My wife would love to play and I would not mind checking it out at all.


Well to be fair he's already sharing it with 2 other people plus I don't have a lot of free time at the moment, hence my reluctance to get involved in another mmorpg.  I have signed up for the Europe Beta so if I get in I will share that if you are not in by then.
Riggswolfe
Terracotta Army
Posts: 7007


Reply #21 on: July 12, 2004, 10:56:07 AM

I second Alluvian's call to all of you who are to cool to use your CD keys to donate them. I know at least one or two members of F13 who would like to play and I've got 2 non-F13 friends who are chomping at the bit, taking over my computer every time they come over.

Really, this whole debate just goes back to my whole issue with PvP. It takes resources from the gameplay I like. I still say, make a game PvP from the getgo, or make it PvE. Period.

"We live in a country, where John Lennon takes six bullets in the chest, Yoko Ono was standing right next to him and not one fucking bullet! Explain that to me! Explain that to me, God! Explain it to me, God!" - Denis Leary summing up my feelings about the nature of the universe.
kaid
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3105


Reply #22 on: July 12, 2004, 10:57:09 AM

Frankly before they start going thinking of big balance issues such as instant spells they first REALLY need to finish adding in core game features like the talent system.

Right now there are two types of spells instant and channeling I think they call it. Instant is just that instant click the button the spell fires off and is difficult to impossible to iterupt. Channeling at the moment except for the talent system for mages if you take any damage at all your spell goes poof.

It does not take a brain surgeon to know that in a fast pvp environment channeling spells are worse than useless. May as well not even have the things in pvp as you will rarely if ever get a chance to use them. It should be no shock people rely on the spells that function and that spell casters who have more of these will rely on them.


The talent system for mages adds the ability to give you percent chance ability to still cast chaneling spells after taking damage. Once all casters get this people will start being able to cast the bigger harder to use spells and rely less on instants.


Removing or reducing instants now before seeing the final impact of the talent system is a very good way to ride DAOC's maniacle pvp balancing run away train.

I am of the opinion if you make a game pve and add in PVP this late in the cycle its probably best to go the eq route. Give some limited variations between how spells work on players when cast by other players but do not change pve balance to improve the afterthought pvp.  Trying to balance things for pvp and having that effect pve will only make pve less intersting while not really helping pvp very much.


Kaid
Morfiend
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6009

wants a greif tittle


Reply #23 on: July 12, 2004, 12:29:35 PM

Quote from: angry.bob
I ask again, what's the appeal to people besides mass gankers and griefers? 'Cause I'm just not seeing any.


I'll tell you why I do it. Simple. It is fun. There are kinds that need to be worked out, and a lot of balance issues, but even with all that, it is fun.

It seems to me, a lot of you guys who have not played the game, are calling it EQ reskinned. Well, it doesnt FEEL like EQ when you play it. Thats what the two warring side bring I think.

I personally dont need a reason to PVP, some sort of Real Points or slight exp would be nice, but I just have fun PVPing, and that is enough for me.

Unlike DAoC, even when dealing with a higher levelk player, it is very rarely insta-death. A 1 on 1 battle (which I have had many in the wilds) lasts around 45+ seconds, and at higher levels there are a bunch of heal potions and stuff. Also, player skill does play a big roll.

Also, to the guy who hasnt player but said grouping is necessary. Thats totally untrue. Yes for some quests, you do need to group, but they are marked "Elite" so players know they have to group. I think out of about 100+ quests I have done, about 10 have been Elite.

Other than those I have soloed about 85% of my time, and doing fine. I thinkI might actually do better solo. It really depends on what quest you are on, weather solo or grouped is optimal, but 100% can be done grouped, and about 95% could be done solo.
Morfiend
Terracotta Army
Posts: 6009

wants a greif tittle


Reply #24 on: July 12, 2004, 12:32:53 PM

Quote from: kaid
Right now there are two types of spells instant and channeling I think they call it. Instant is just that instant click the button the spell fires off and is difficult to impossible to iterupt. Channeling at the moment except for the talent system for mages if you take any damage at all your spell goes poof.


No, there are three types.

Instant, Channeling, and Regular.

The regular spells have a cast time. Once you click the cast button a little bar comes up, and starts moving. Usually taking between 1 second and 6 seconds depending on the spell. If you get hit while this bar is moving, you lose some of the gain in the bar. So unlike channeling spells, you dont totally lose you spell if hit, but it will take longer to cast if you are getting wailed on. Thats why when fighting mages as a warrior, I use Duel Wield to maximize the amount of times I hit, making it take much longer for them to cast.
kaid
Terracotta Army
Posts: 3105


Reply #25 on: July 12, 2004, 01:03:04 PM

Ah I did not know there was the third category all people ever mention on the boards is the first two. Still given your tactics if you were on the receiving end of a dual wielded attack would you ever bother to use anything but instants?

Given that they want to limit crowd control more than it already is in pvp most fighters are going to get up to melee range with the casters. Nothing is more annoying than being a punching bag without the ability to defend yourself.

My guess is due to that layout whichever  caster has the most instants will likely be the caster you see in pvp.


kaid
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 40430

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


WWW
Reply #26 on: July 12, 2004, 02:30:26 PM

Quote
- Prevalence of crowd-control and root/snare. Right now there is too much of this stuff. We'll address this issue at least in part in this push with dimishing returns in PvP for some of these spells. More improvements to come later...


NOOOOOOO, REALLY?!?!?!?!?!

It's not like every other fucking game with PVP ever enabled in any part of the world hasn't already proven this over and fucking over again. Crowd control spells in PVP absolutely fucking destroy any semblance of PVP balance unless they are either disabled for PVP or greatly tooled with to make sure the fights aren't "Mez first = teh win!" type of battles.

EDIT: Any idiot that advocates a HARSHER penalty for PVP needs to be locked naked in a room with a rabid homosexual giant ferret that's been on shore leave for 600 HUNDRED YEARS.

PVP should never, and I mean, NEVER have a death penalty associated with it other than the occasional drop of loot... UNLESS, you want to punish anyone who participates in PVP. And in that case, Lineage 2 has it right (you attack someone, you are attackable by everyone, etc.). If you want PVE players to never PVP or go in PVP areas, make good and sure you put a masochistic death penalty on it, because that'll damn sure keep them away.

Honestly, every bit of this shit has already been learned and proven by EQ, DAoC, Shadowbane, UO and SWG. It sounds to me like the Blizzard fuckers haven't learned to stop listening to the hordes of retarded fanbois that infest their message boards.

Design by Message Board Warriors and Furor-Wannabes. Yeah, that'll make a good game.

El Gallo
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2213


Reply #27 on: July 12, 2004, 02:42:57 PM

Yeah, man.  Totally outrageous for them to have mez in PvP because they haven't recoded every spell to act differently in PvP when we are 4+ months away from release.  I should ask for my money back.

This thread is why not having a NDA was the worst idea ever.

Edit: The first test of the faction PvP system in the beta test doesn't have spell rebalancing specifically for PvP.  SHOCKING I TELL YOU.  It's almost like they wanted to test core faction combat functionality before balancing it.  OH MY GOD WHAT MORONS.  Maybe they even want to implement talents for each class before rebalancing every spell and ability for PvP used?  OMG RETARDED MONKEYS ON CRACK!!!1111!!!

Considering how easy it is to get back up and running after you die, you pretty much need to have some penalty for PvP death.  Otherwise, you are right back where you died, at full health and mana, a minute after you die, because there are respawn points everywhere.  It is impossible to have any territory control with that situation.  Some kind of penalty needs to happen, whether it be making you respawn way back in your race's garveyard, a timeout, or whatever.

This post makes me want to squeeze into my badass red jeans.
Margalis
Terracotta Army
Posts: 12335


Reply #28 on: July 12, 2004, 02:46:32 PM

At least they are realizing NOW that there is a problem, unlike say SWG and the knockdown exploits. Recognizing that there is a problem is step 1. A lot of people never make it that far. (Not a response to El Gallo)

vampirehipi23: I would enjoy a book written by a monkey and turned into a movie rather than this.
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 40430

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


WWW
Reply #29 on: July 12, 2004, 02:51:11 PM

My point, whether the game is in release or not, is that anyone even considering adding PVP to a level-based, PVE-centric game should have already known about crowd control spells. It's like Step 1: How to Fuck Balance in PVP: Crowd Control Spells.

As for a penalty for PVP death, I wasn't aware that the death-zerg rush was a valid tactic. I suppose I'm so used to PVE games where death means respawning at least 5-15 minutes away from where you died. In that case, a time out before you can PVP is good. I just don't consider that much of a penalty. When I hear penalty, I'm thinking exp. loss.

Nebu
Terracotta Army
Posts: 17613


Reply #30 on: July 12, 2004, 02:53:39 PM

I've always wondered why PvE games don't just create a separate set of hotkeys for PvP spells.  Most games have multiple hotbars, so setting up a pvp hotbar would be no big deal.  Also, this would allow a separate set of testing and avoid some of the worst pve vs. pvp spell problems.  Nerfing effects/damage for spells in pvp seems to produce a negative vibe.  Creating "new buttons" for the nerfed spells may be a solid alternative.  

Just a thought really... though I stand by a statement I made on waterthread many moons ago: noone has successfully made a pve game with balanced pvp to date.  I expect Blizzard to give it a good shot, but let's face it... WoW is directed toward those that enjoy pve catassing goodness.

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

-  Mark Twain
El Gallo
Terracotta Army
Posts: 2213


Reply #31 on: July 12, 2004, 02:56:08 PM

Yeah, it is a different mindset having such an unbelievably light PvE death penalty.  And yeah everyone there knows mez fucks up PvP (especially since the resists system is rather spotty at the moment).  I think they just wanted to make sure that the AvH server actually worked before balancing seriously for PvP.  If they have this after release, I'll be flaming along with you, brother.

Damn, did we just say the exact same thing twice, once with flames and once with sweet nothings?  <3

This post makes me want to squeeze into my badass red jeans.
HRose
I'm Special
Posts: 1205

VIKLAS!


WWW
Reply #32 on: July 12, 2004, 03:01:21 PM

Quote from: angry.bob
Heck, with the new engine in Catacombs, DAoC is even the best looking game coming out

Best lagging game for sure. It doesn't even need Catacombs.

About the rest I've learnt in these months to wait what Blizzard really introduces, without guessing for the worst beforehand. In general they react in a good way and if they do something lame they adjust it.

Everyone knew all these problems, as I joined the beta some of my posts were exactly about the difficulties WoW would have encountered in the PvP due to the focus on PvE. At least they have on track those problems and I'll wait to see how they shape the game.

They aren't completely deaf and blind at finding and addressing the problems.

-HRose / Abalieno
cesspit.net
eldaec
Terracotta Army
Posts: 10913


Reply #33 on: July 12, 2004, 04:02:47 PM

Are they turning collision detection on in WoW?

"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
HaemishM
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 40430

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


WWW
Reply #34 on: July 12, 2004, 04:57:23 PM

BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAA!!!




I do not know, but as you can probably tell, my bet's on "No."

Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
f13.net  |  f13.net General Forums  |  The Gaming Graveyard  |  World of Warcraft  |  Topic: WoW PVP Update  
Jump to:  

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