Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Fuzzy Avatars Solved! Please re-upload your avatar if it was fuzzy!

Changing factions

devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member

I am not sure if this has been answered yet, but I am wondering if you will be able to switch factions easily in RvRvR without having to create a new character/ log out ect. Say you have a Breton, will you be able to play RvRvR  in Ebonheart ect?

 

I asked them directly, and will see if I get a  response, but am wondering if this has already been answered.

 

Thanks!

~Carrie

«1

Comments

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,609Member Uncommon

    You can not change factions,

     

    Most information can be found at the Development FAQ over at the Tamriel Foundry. They keep it up to date too:

    http://tamrielfoundry.com/development-faq/#alliance-overview

     

  • MarkusrindMarkusrind CrawleyPosts: 359Member

    Yeah they have a weird hangup about factions when you look at their design. In most other area's of the game it is all about freedom but when it comes to factions everything becomes locked down.

    Their race/faction lock is just an indication that they are still locked into old design philosophis and why I think the game will really under perform. It might be an OK game but it might well be the last of the old generation of themepark games.

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member

    I certainly hope they have a change of heart on that. It is such a game killer for PvP when everyone evacs to the winning side and there is no easy way to balance it out.

    Hopefully they will correct that in time, otherwise they are crippling their PvP from the start.

  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEPosts: 2,836Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by deviliscious
    I certainly hope they have a change of heart on that. It is such a game killer for PvP when everyone evacs to the winning side and there is no easy way to balance it out.Hopefully they will correct that in time, otherwise they are crippling their PvP from the start.

    well, if they allowed you to easily switch factions, what do you think will happen? people will always switch to the winning side.

    the way they have it set up is you cannot easily switch campaigns and if you do you do not get to pick which one is appointed to you.

    campaigns are not chosen, they are appointed to you, that is how they will balance it, you don't pick the winning side.

    you also will not have multiple characters of different factions tied to the same campaign. so if you re-roll another faction because the campaign your other character is in is on the losing side, the campaign your new character will be in will be in a different one.

    read up on the game a little more before jumping to conclusions IMO

  • baphametbaphamet omaha, NEPosts: 2,836Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Markusrind
    Yeah they have a weird hangup about factions when you look at their design. In most other area's of the game it is all about freedom but when it comes to factions everything becomes locked down.Their race/faction lock is just an indication that they are still locked into old design philosophis and why I think the game will really under perform. It might be an OK game but it might well be the last of the old generation of themepark games.

    as opposed to a new pvp design philosophy? such as?

  • DavisFlightDavisFlight Talahasee, FLPosts: 2,556Member
    If the answer is yes, this game is even more fucked than it seems already.
  • keithiankeithian Los Angeles, CAPosts: 3,042Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    If the answer is yes, this game is even more fucked than it seems already.

    That post helped a lot. I prefer a game where people can switch factions on the fly to completely destroy the balance of the game. That way I can always ensure I am on the winning side. Genius.

    There Is Always Hope!

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by baphamet

     


    Originally posted by deviliscious
    I certainly hope they have a change of heart on that. It is such a game killer for PvP when everyone evacs to the winning side and there is no easy way to balance it out.

     

    Hopefully they will correct that in time, otherwise they are crippling their PvP from the start.


     

    well, if they allowed you to easily switch factions, what do you think will happen? people will always switch to the winning side.

    the way they have it set up is you cannot easily switch campaigns and if you do you do not get to pick which one is appointed to you.

    campaigns are not chosen, they are appointed to you, that is how they will balance it, you don't pick the winning side.

    you also will not have multiple characters of different factions tied to the same campaign. so if you re-roll another faction because the campaign your other character is in is on the losing side, the campaign your new character will be in will be in a different one.

    read up on the game a little more before jumping to conclusions IMO

    You know how this works in reality right? This isn't the first time this has been done.

    One side becomes the most powerful, always happens regardless. People flock to the winning realm and the losing realms become the " PvE servers" ( yes I know there is only one server, but that doesn't matter when it is divided into realms.)

    So PvP boils down to one side that wipes the floor with whoever is stupid enough to walk in the other teams.  everyone who was tired of losing all the time either quits PvP all together or switches to the winning realm.

    When you can switch sides easily,  guilds will switch sides more frequently, ensuring not one side wins ALL the time. It is the Random masses that flock to the winning team, not the guilds.

    Making this more difficult only ensures that the other teams get abandoned and stay that way.

     

    When people can choose sides at will, when one side wins too much guilds can choose to be the underdog and switch sides to have a more challenging fight. When you make that harder to do, you are preventing the guilds from restoring balance, thus crippling the PvP for everyone.

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by keithian
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    If the answer is yes, this game is even more fucked than it seems already.

    That post helped a lot. I prefer a game where people can switch factions on the fly to completely destroy the balance of the game. That way I can always ensure I am on the winning side. Genius.

    You do realize that the guilds that offset the balance of the game will be able to do that already don't you? Hell on one game I played every guild member had  different accounts they payed subs on. David payed over $150 a month in sub fees  a month to ONE game.  People play on multiple computers at the same time. That is the reality of this. I have 8 Pc's sitting here at my disposal if I really wanted to..

     

    As for ruining the balance of the game, that is pretty much guaranteed with race locked factions. People will  get tired of losing and permanently switch to the winning realm and the other two realms will be evacuated for PvP. That cripples the PvP for everyone when you have one side  overpowered. It always happens regardless. People will either switch or quit the game all together. Been there done that, why would you want to see it die that way again?

     

    They are going to switch sides anyhow. If you make it easier for them to do so, the balance actually gets corrected FASTER, instead of staying unbalanced forever.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,609Member Uncommon

    That's a very strange argument against faction locks. It almost sounds like you're saying that since the FPS crowd (AKA "new" MMO crowd) always games the system and exploits it in any possible way, we might as well go with the flow and make it easier...

    But you're not taking the nature of multiple balanced campaigns into consideration. The campaigns will be easy to balance with an upper limit on how many people from each faction belong to a particular campaign. The number of campaigns available will be determined by the lowest denominator: i.e. the alliance with the least number of players divided by 1000 (or whatever the number is) 

    You would have known all of this had you followed the link in my previous post,,,but whatever, this is one of the things you would have found there: 

    "Campaigns are designed to accomodate approximately 2,000 concurrent players each. The number of active campaigns will be adjusted to compensate for overall server population if necessary."

    If you just give that some thought, you'll realize that the overpopulated alliances may very well have queues and the less populated ones won't, They will be balancing the campaigns around the number of concurrent players and it can be easily managed. I guess if someone is willing to stomach queues to be on the winning side, they can do that. But it seems like a pretty good disincentive to me.

    Population imbalances can be adjusted in this MMO on the fly. You're talking about what can happen in traditional server-based MMOs... which do indeed get quickly unbalanced. Methinks you picked the wrong MMO to promote easy switching for balancing reasons. There ain't a need to do that in this one.

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by Iselin

    That's a very strange argument against faction locks. It almost sounds like you're saying that since the FPS crowd (AKA "new" MMO crowd) always games the system and exploits it in any possible way, we might as well go with the flow and make it easier...

    But you're not taking the nature of multiple balanced campaigns into consideration. The campaigns will be easy to balance with an upper limit on how many people from each faction belong to a particular campaign. The number of campaigns available will be determined by the lowest denominator: i.e. the alliance with the least number of players divided by 1000 (or whatever the number is) 

    You would have known all of this had you followed the link in my previous post,,,but whatever, this is one of the things you would have found there: 

    "Campaigns are designed to accomodate approximately 2,000 concurrent players each. The number of active campaigns will be adjusted to compensate for overall server population if necessary."

    If you just give that some thought, you'll realize that the overpopulated alliances may very well have queues and the less populated ones won't, They will be balancing the campaigns around the number of concurrent players and it can be easily managed. I guess if someone is willing to stomach queues to be on the winning side, they can do that. But it seems like a pretty good disincentive to me.

    Population imbalances can be adjusted in this MMO on the fly. You're talking about what can happen in traditional server-based MMOs... which do indeed get quickly unbalanced. Methinks you picked the wrong MMO to promote easy switching for balancing reasons. There ain't a need to do that in this one.

    LOL this isn't the " new crowd" You are talking about people who have been playing PvP in MMO's since the 90's.

    I don't think you are understanding what I am saying here. Just because it is populated, does not mean they are organized or coordinated, nor does it mean they ever will be. You will have more organized and coordinated guilds permanently on one side  and a bunch of randoms on the others. " population" won't be the problem, skill and organization will be.  People will wait longer on the winning side because they would have to start over to play on the losing side, and for what? To lose? Waiting is better than losing.  When you look at my old guild alone, you are talking about 600 people on headset coordinating at once who have played together for over 10+ years.  Now start adding a bunch of these guilds into the game. When one realm gets more of them than the others, it is going to dominate and continue to dominate regardless of what the other realms try to do, and people will permanently switch to the other side because they are tired of losing.

     

    All this does is:

    1) Forces players to spend more time waiting in game than actually playing it.

    2) Prevents players from playing the game with the people they wish to play the game with.

    3) guarantees overpowered teams stay over powered longer.

     

    None of that is a recipe for successful long term PvP.  It is shooting itself in the foot before it gets started.

     

     I guess Todd Howard Stating that TESO is not canon to the single player series was a smart thing for him to do in case this doesn't turn out so well.

     

     

     

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,066Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Markusrind

    Yeah they have a weird hangup about factions when you look at their design. In most other area's of the game it is all about freedom but when it comes to factions everything becomes locked down.

    Their race/faction lock is just an indication that they are still locked into old design philosophis and why I think the game will really under perform. It might be an OK game but it might well be the last of the old generation of themepark games.

    That's because it follows the DAoC model of reinforcing community and realm pride.  Whether it will work in this day and age of instant gratification is a whole other ball game but I would like to see the realm faction pride feel and mean something again.  It you've never played DAoC I understand it may be hard to grasp but trust me when I say back in 2002 it worked, and worked well.  To this day I keep in contact with most of my friends I made In that game.  Other then AC, none of the current McMMO's released in the last 7 years can say the same for me.  I don't even recall my Guild leader in Neverwinter and I quit the game last month.  Same for any of the last few MMO's I've played since I quit WoW in 2011.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,066Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by Iselin

     

     

    All this does is:

    1) Forces players to spend more time waiting in game than actually playing it.

    2) Prevents players from playing the game with the people they wish to play the game with.

    3) guarantees overpowered teams stay over powered longer.

    1. How does it force people to wait when everyone in your guild will be assigned to the same campaign?  I can't imagine your guild fielding a 2000 zerg every single hour of the day.
    2. If your in the same guild you'll be able to play in the Alliance versus Alliance area at any time, there shouldn't be any queue's since the area is so large and population limit is so large.
    3. Well then, you best be coordinating with that 3rd faction to create a temporary truce to tackle an existing enemy.  But chances are you're the type of player who instead of working out a solution will run off and gank the nearest non winning faction member you want to get your PvP fix. 
    It worked in DAoC and it'll work in TESO if the players allow it work.  I played Albion Guinevere for close to 3 years and the entire time we were the most populated realm but I assure you, the Hibs and Mids kept us busy every single day.  Often times kept us choked in within our own Milegate because they worked together to overcome a greater threat.  If Hib or Mid had gone their own way we would of annihilated both sides and kept both realms choked up at their own MG.  And the game would of become extremely unfun but because the 2 weaker realms worked together as the game was designed to be, our overwhelming numbers were kept in check night in and night out.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by Markusrind

    Yeah they have a weird hangup about factions when you look at their design. In most other area's of the game it is all about freedom but when it comes to factions everything becomes locked down.

    Their race/faction lock is just an indication that they are still locked into old design philosophis and why I think the game will really under perform. It might be an OK game but it might well be the last of the old generation of themepark games.

    That's because it follows the DAoC model of reinforcing community and realm pride.  Whether it will work in this day and age of instant gratification is a whole other ball game but I would like to see the realm faction pride feel and mean something again.  It you've never played DAoC I understand it may be hard to grasp but trust me when I say back in 2002 it worked, and worked well.  To this day I keep in contact with most of my friends I made In that game.  Other then AC, none of the current McMMO's released in the last 7 years can say the same for me.  I don't even recall my Guild leader in Neverwinter and I quit the game last month.  Same for any of the last few MMO's I've played since I quit WoW in 2011.

    I played DAoC,  and I see why things go downhill. Everyone keeps trying to revive it, but it isn't going to happen. It was what it was for the time it was, but that is long gone now.  People will switch realms permanently, they don't have the " loyalty" they used to.  Guilds hop from game to game to game now together as one unit expanding like the Borg.  This will not go away, it is here to stay and is only expanding. If games are not designed to accommodate this they get crushed. It is just the way of the world now. Guild loyalty trumps game loyalty EVERY time.

  • MarkusrindMarkusrind CrawleyPosts: 359Member
    Originally posted by baphamet

     


    Originally posted by Markusrind
    Yeah they have a weird hangup about factions when you look at their design. In most other area's of the game it is all about freedom but when it comes to factions everything becomes locked down.

     

    Their race/faction lock is just an indication that they are still locked into old design philosophis and why I think the game will really under perform. It might be an OK game but it might well be the last of the old generation of themepark games.


     

    as opposed to a new pvp design philosophy? such as?

    I didn't mention PVP at all. Telling.....

    I simply said old design refering to the very structured designs where you are just going from point A to point B with no choice involved or where you are forced into certain configurations without choice being involved. .

    Old = You are x race, you must be y faction, you can only be z classes, you can only use certain skills

    New = You can be any race, be any faction, be any class, use any skill - but your choices mean something.

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,066Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by keithian
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    If the answer is yes, this game is even more fucked than it seems already.

    That post helped a lot. I prefer a game where people can switch factions on the fly to completely destroy the balance of the game. That way I can always ensure I am on the winning side. Genius.

    You do realize that the guilds that offset the balance of the game will be able to do that already don't you? Hell on one game I played every guild member had  different accounts they payed subs on. David payed over $150 a month in sub fees  a month to ONE game.  People play on multiple computers at the same time. That is the reality of this. I have 8 Pc's sitting here at my disposal if I really wanted to..

     

    As for ruining the balance of the game, that is pretty much guaranteed with race locked factions. People will  get tired of losing and permanently switch to the winning realm and the other two realms will be evacuated for PvP. That cripples the PvP for everyone when you have one side  overpowered. It always happens regardless. People will either switch or quit the game all together. Been there done that, why would you want to see it die that way again?

     

    They are going to switch sides anyhow. If you make it easier for them to do so, the balance actually gets corrected FASTER, instead of staying unbalanced forever.

     DAoC says otherwise

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by keithian
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    If the answer is yes, this game is even more fucked than it seems already.

    That post helped a lot. I prefer a game where people can switch factions on the fly to completely destroy the balance of the game. That way I can always ensure I am on the winning side. Genius.

    You do realize that the guilds that offset the balance of the game will be able to do that already don't you? Hell on one game I played every guild member had  different accounts they payed subs on. David payed over $150 a month in sub fees  a month to ONE game.  People play on multiple computers at the same time. That is the reality of this. I have 8 Pc's sitting here at my disposal if I really wanted to..

     

    As for ruining the balance of the game, that is pretty much guaranteed with race locked factions. People will  get tired of losing and permanently switch to the winning realm and the other two realms will be evacuated for PvP. That cripples the PvP for everyone when you have one side  overpowered. It always happens regardless. People will either switch or quit the game all together. Been there done that, why would you want to see it die that way again?

     

    They are going to switch sides anyhow. If you make it easier for them to do so, the balance actually gets corrected FASTER, instead of staying unbalanced forever.

     DAoC says otherwise

    How is that working for them these days?

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,609Member Uncommon

    And switching factions fixes this how exactly? The guild of uber PVPers splits up to fight against itself?

    And why are all the uber guilds on the same side to begin with? You're saying an even population won't be likely to produce an even representation of good and bad PVPers in each faction?

    If you've been PVPing for 10 years as you say, and as have I, then I wouldn't need to tell you that there's something different going on today. MMOers don't pay $150 bucks a month for 10 subs so they can multibox and rule the world. That would be the hyper-competitive esport gamer slumming from COD. I know the type very well. I doubt they'd last 30 days in ESO with no instant gratification scenario PVP and scoreboards...which is the type of PVP they love.

    In the old days of Dark Age of Camelot, there would be one or two guys multiboxing and we all thought they were weird. And FPSers didn't MMO back then... they do now.

    You're right, this game doesn't cater to the uber PVP crowd. Don't they have DFUW for the ones who have the balls, or WOW for the scenario junkies?

    The best thinking man's PVP game ever was DAoC. Lot's of room for strategy and tactics there when planning and executing relic keep assaults or defenses. Their only problems was that they didn't merge servers quickly enough and once Mark Jacobs realized he couldn't beat WOW, he tried to join them with all kinds of weird changes. The original, for the 1st couple of years, just worked... and oh yeah, they had 3 locked factions.

     

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by Iselin

     

     

    All this does is:

    1) Forces players to spend more time waiting in game than actually playing it.

    2) Prevents players from playing the game with the people they wish to play the game with.

    3) guarantees overpowered teams stay over powered longer.

    1. How does it force people to wait when everyone in your guild will be assigned to the same campaign?  I can't imagine your guild fielding a 2000 zerg every single hour of the day.
    2. If your in the same guild you'll be able to play in the Alliance versus Alliance area at any time, there shouldn't be any queue's since the area is so large and population limit is so large.
    3. Well then, you best be coordinating with that 3rd faction to create a temporary truce to tackle an existing enemy.  But chances are you're the type of player who instead of working out a solution will run off and gank the nearest non winning faction member you want to get your PvP fix. 
    It worked in DAoC and it'll work in TESO if the players allow it work.  I played Albion Guinevere for close to 3 years and the entire time we were the most populated realm but I assure you, the Hibs and Mids kept us busy every single day.  Often times kept us choked in within our own Milegate because they worked together to overcome a greater threat.  If Hib or Mid had gone their own way we would of annihilated both sides and kept both realms choked up at their own MG.  And the game would of become extremely unfun but because the 2 weaker realms worked together as the game was designed to be, our overwhelming numbers were kept in check night in and night out.

    1) Who are they going to play when everyone moved to the winning realm? How long are they going to have to wait to play if one realm becomes more populated for pvp than the others?

    2) Say your guild is Ebonheart, can you , as a Breton fight alongside them as a Breton?  Oh wait...

    3) What are you going o0n about? If you want to know the type of PvP I am you can read my post in developers corner here rather than make ridiculous assumptions:  http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/159765/the-best-pvp-combat-a-girls-perspective.html

    You know warhammer tried to resuscitate DAoC and failed. GW2 tried to perform a Frankenstein..  the bottom line is, it isn't working for DAoC anymore,  Guild Loyalty> Game loyalty every time. Guilds have grown from their infancy and become large  massive forces to be reckoned with moving from game to game. Failing to understand that has changed from the past  is shortsighted and not well thought through.  This is the reality of gaming in 2013. When one side gets too many guilds, it is going to win and keep winning. So what  are they implementing to allow guilds to balance it out when too many of them choose the same side? Can they just go to the underdog realm and solve it? ....

     

     

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by Iselin

    And switching factions fixes this how exactly? The guild of uber PVPers splits up to fight against itself?

    And why are all the uber guilds on the same side to begin with? You're saying an even population won't be likely to produce an even representation of good and bad PVPers in each faction?

    If you've been PVPing for 10 years as you say, and as have I, then I wouldn't need to tell you that there's something different going on today. MMOers don't pay $150 bucks a month for 10 subs so they can multibox and rule the world. That would be the hyper-competitive esport gamer slumming from COD. I know the type very well. I doubt they'd last 30 days in ESO with no instant gratification scenario PVP and scoreboards...which is the type of PVP they love.

    In the old days of Dark Age of Camelot, there would be one or two guys multiboxing and we all thought they were weird. And FPSers didn't MMO back then... they do now.

    You're right, this game doesn't cater to the uber PVP crowd. Don't they have DFUW for the ones who have the balls, or WOW for the scenario junkies?

    The best thinking man's PVP game ever was DAoC. Lot's of room for strategy and tactics there when planning and executing relic keep assaults or defenses. Their only problems was that they didn't merge servers quickly enough and once Mark Jacobs realized he couldn't beat WOW, he tried to join them with all kinds of weird changes. The original, for the 1st couple of years, just worked... and oh yeah, they had 3 locked factions.

     

    YES. It actually does.  You see Good PvPers WANT challenging pvp. It will be the randoms that will rush into the winning side, and  when one side gets too overpowered, they hop to the other side for challenging gameplay.  They can choose to be the underdogs for a better fight. If you remove their ability to do so easily, all it does is keep having more people pour into the winning team instead. One of my fav things to do was to pit me and a few other guildies against the ENTIRE guild to show 'em how it's done. LOL I prefer that, but you aren't going to want to move to the other realm permanently, or have to change race to do so, that is just stupid.

     Idk what you are wowing about, just take a look at EVE to get a better understanding of how guilds work in reality.

     The Wowers are going to be the first ones to run over to the winning side and make a mess of it. LOL

    Everyone has been leaving that game.. guess where they will turn up next? AHHH! The horror!

  • PAL-18PAL-18 AnachronoxPosts: 802Member

    No matter how it is now but in the end they will allow it.

    Just look what happened to PS2.

    Planet earth triples its water mass and islands will sink   when those peeps(WTJs) starts crying why they *need* faction change.I.E winning team joiner (WTJ)

    Just wait.

    So, did ESO have a successful launch? Yes, yes it did.
    By Ryan Getchell on April 02, 2014.
    **On the radar:http://cyberpunk.net/**

  • azzamasinazzamasin Butler, OHPosts: 3,066Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by keithian
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    If the answer is yes, this game is even more fucked than it seems already.

    That post helped a lot. I prefer a game where people can switch factions on the fly to completely destroy the balance of the game. That way I can always ensure I am on the winning side. Genius.

    You do realize that the guilds that offset the balance of the game will be able to do that already don't you? Hell on one game I played every guild member had  different accounts they payed subs on. David payed over $150 a month in sub fees  a month to ONE game.  People play on multiple computers at the same time. That is the reality of this. I have 8 Pc's sitting here at my disposal if I really wanted to..

     

    As for ruining the balance of the game, that is pretty much guaranteed with race locked factions. People will  get tired of losing and permanently switch to the winning realm and the other two realms will be evacuated for PvP. That cripples the PvP for everyone when you have one side  overpowered. It always happens regardless. People will either switch or quit the game all together. Been there done that, why would you want to see it die that way again?

     

    They are going to switch sides anyhow. If you make it easier for them to do so, the balance actually gets corrected FASTER, instead of staying unbalanced forever.

     DAoC says otherwise

    How is that working for them these days?

    Would of worked extremely well if they hadn't done a 180 on game design and try and turn the game into a PvE game.  Same as any game that starts out with a general market they try to reach then alienate them with a change in course.  It being a 3 faction RvR game wasn't what drove them to mediocrity.  Its the same correlation as UO's Trammel, SWG's NGE etc. etc. etc.

     

    If WoW was to change their model from a raid game in the next expansion and not implemented any new raids, the game would die as well.  SO it isn't the game that's the problem its the change that caused DAoC to fail.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

    Subscription Gaming, especially MMO gaming is a Cash grab bigger then the most P2W cash shop!

    Bring Back Exploration and lengthy progression times. RPG's have always been about the Journey not the destination!!!

    image

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,609Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    You know warhammer tried to resuscitate DAoC and failed. GW2 tried to perform a Frankenstein..  the bottom line is, it isn't working for DAoC anymore,  Guild Loyalty> Game loyalty every time. Guilds have grown from their infancy and become large  massive forces to be reckoned with moving from game to game. Failing to understand that has changed from the past  is shortsighted and not well thought through.  This is the reality of gaming in 2013. When one side gets too many guilds, it is going to win and keep winning. So what  are they implementing to allow guilds to balance it out when too many of them choose the same side? Can they just go to the underdog realm and solve it? ....

     

    WAR screwed it up by having multiple PVP "lakes", 2-sided PVP and a whole shit pile of scenarios. RVR style PVP happened by accident when people weren't just racking up the points keep flipping or leaving because their scenario was ready.

    GW2 tried and got some of it right, But ultimately, just WTF is server allegiance? If they had Asurans fighting against the humans and the leafy elf replacement in that kind of 3 sided PVP (or hell, make it 4-sided and throw in the Gar) that would have made a much more interesting game. Plus there's way too much server flipping there because it's easy to do and go to the winning server. A big part of the problem there is what you're saying is the cure.

     

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by azzamasin
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    Originally posted by keithian
    Originally posted by DavisFlight
    If the answer is yes, this game is even more fucked than it seems already.

    That post helped a lot. I prefer a game where people can switch factions on the fly to completely destroy the balance of the game. That way I can always ensure I am on the winning side. Genius.

    You do realize that the guilds that offset the balance of the game will be able to do that already don't you? Hell on one game I played every guild member had  different accounts they payed subs on. David payed over $150 a month in sub fees  a month to ONE game.  People play on multiple computers at the same time. That is the reality of this. I have 8 Pc's sitting here at my disposal if I really wanted to..

     

    As for ruining the balance of the game, that is pretty much guaranteed with race locked factions. People will  get tired of losing and permanently switch to the winning realm and the other two realms will be evacuated for PvP. That cripples the PvP for everyone when you have one side  overpowered. It always happens regardless. People will either switch or quit the game all together. Been there done that, why would you want to see it die that way again?

     

    They are going to switch sides anyhow. If you make it easier for them to do so, the balance actually gets corrected FASTER, instead of staying unbalanced forever.

     DAoC says otherwise

    How is that working for them these days?

    Would of worked extremely well if they hadn't done a 180 on game design and try and turn the game into a PvE game.  Same as any game that starts out with a general market they try to reach then alienate them with a change in course.  It being a 3 faction RvR game wasn't what drove them to mediocrity.  Its the same correlation as UO's Trammel, SWG's NGE etc. etc. etc.

     

    If WoW was to change their model from a raid game in the next expansion and not implemented any new raids, the game would die as well.  SO it isn't the game that's the problem its the change that caused DAoC to fail.

    Yes but if you created  DAoC now, it would be all screwed up as well because the player demographics are very different now. Games have to be equipped to deal with the mega guilds rather than just soloers/ small guilds or balance gets crushed quick.

  • devilisciousdeviliscious dallas, TXPosts: 6,906Member
    Originally posted by Iselin
    Originally posted by deviliscious
    You know warhammer tried to resuscitate DAoC and failed. GW2 tried to perform a Frankenstein..  the bottom line is, it isn't working for DAoC anymore,  Guild Loyalty> Game loyalty every time. Guilds have grown from their infancy and become large  massive forces to be reckoned with moving from game to game. Failing to understand that has changed from the past  is shortsighted and not well thought through.  This is the reality of gaming in 2013. When one side gets too many guilds, it is going to win and keep winning. So what  are they implementing to allow guilds to balance it out when too many of them choose the same side? Can they just go to the underdog realm and solve it? ....

     

    WAR screwed it up by having multiple PVP "lakes", 2-sided PVP and a whole shit pile of scenarios. RVR style PVP happened by accident when people weren't just racking up the points keep flipping or leaving because their scenario was ready.

    GW2 tried and got some of it right, But ultimately, just WTF is server allegiance? If they had Asurans fighting against the humans and the leafy elf replacement in that kind of 3 sided PVP (or hell, make it 4-sided and throw in the Gar) that would have made a much more interesting game. Plus there's way too much server flipping there because it's easy to do and go to the winning server. A big part of the problem there is what you're saying is the cure.

     

    How is making the overpowered servers stay over powered rather than allow guilds to go underdog solving that issue? That doesn't solve it, it just makes it stay broken. They will just go to the winning  server and stay there... Who's going to hop to the losing server to fix it? Oh yea.. no one.

«1
Sign In or Register to comment.