Killing should be primary objective over keep taking.
CC was always the red herring in DAoC and even though it was fun for an 8 man gank group to kill a 40 man zerg, it should never be like that. twice their numbers I can understand but again when you make killing the enemy the primary method you have things like that. I do like the short duration CC effects that GW2 uses, it feels more natural and allows greater skill to come into play without the shitty feeling of losing control of your character for minutes at a time. In a time before RR's in DAoC, Midguard had the best groups because of their Priests were also the best CC class i nthe game. Getting mezzed for 2 minutes at a time was really disheartening.
CC short and Keep taking should be the primary method of aquiring RvR ranks.
Let's agree to disagree about the CC. I find getting CCed a bunch of times (even if it's for a short time) much more frustrating/infuriating than getting CCed once for a longer time (as long as I know I will have my immunity when it ends).
But why keeps instead of kills? That would surely lead to keep trading and players making zergs and circling each other.
Indeed, long duration CC has gone the way of the Dodo for a reason. A simple reason. Money. People don't like losing control of their characters for long periods of time, and if CC allows for 8 to kill 40 (assuming equal level/skill), there's a serious problem with game design. Charms are practically never seen anymore for PvP, because people would take control of you, and walk you off a cliff. Yay. An I-Win button. Stuns that last longer than a few seconds, same thing. It's NO FUN to not be able to fight.
After all, the objective is Player vs Player *combat* not, Player Vs Statues "One sided slaughter".
Your opinion^ is because of a lack of understanding.... a 40 second CC always had a way out. There were all kinds of counters to remove it, if you so choosed to build your char that way.
It all comes down to how skill your group was and how in sync they are.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
Charms are practically never seen anymore for PvP, because people would take control of you, and walk you off a cliff.
This is by far the most fun thing I have ever done in WoW. Mind control enemies and throw them in the lava in BRM. Back in the day when brm was the PvP hotspot.
6) Names of enemies visible, same enemies all the time (to build rivalries and realm pride, and to make the whole war feel important)
I just wanted to pull this point out. I'm really curious, but doubtful this is going to happen the way players would hope. If you guys recall, they have this "mega-server" thing going on where everyone is instances on one giant server. I'm not sure how it's going to factor into PvP, but I'd guess "not well".
I seriously doubt any possibility of rivals and arch-enemies given the instancing design. If there's 2 million players and you get tossed into instances like they say, it seems you might never see the same players again(unless they are on your friends list).
I don't know, maybe I haven't heard enough detail about how their system works, but it sounds like one giant, sloppy mess of 50 instances per zone/area.
Originally posted by ShakyMo The problem with SOME wow cc is you can take damage while controlled.
I have no problem with say sheep. It's things like rogue stuns and fear that are the problem.
If all cc in wow broke on damage, it would have a good cc system where you used cc more tactically. E.g. you cc the healers at the back then attack all the dos now they have no support.
A lot of mmos make this mistake, then what you get is simple tactic of fire off a bunch if cc at the blob then aoe it to feck.
All cc breaking on damage is good because it forces pvpers to be careful about use of aoe, without really harming pve.
As a PvE'r I could get on board with this idea. It wouldn't screw PvE (I hate 2 second fears/mez argh) and provide more tactical use of it in PvP.
You are arguing open world PvP based on a game that did not have open world PvP...
DaoC was NOT open world. Asherons Call and Ultima Online was OPEN WORLD PvP.
It means you can PvP EVERYWHERE because you can go EVERYWHERE. And no, DaoC was not the best PvP game, I dont know of a single person that played on Darktide in Asherons Call that would say DaoC limited PvPing zones was the best, if anything the game handicapped PvPing by making it grouped based like PvE instances. The very idea of player skill went away and it became a group zerg fest where the side with the most people and best gear wins.
Long gone are the days of two people fighting for 20-30 minutes because they are SKILLED...we are left with 10 second long fights and gank fests.
Who knows, maybe Black Desert will do "DaoC" style zerg PvP the "right way"...outside the closed confines it was placed into and dumped into an actual OPEN WORLD...either way, you wont get it in TESO, they already anounced that the factions will be just like in DaoC, closed to other faction players, and PvP will have its set "zones".
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Long duration CC is and will always be terrible. Controlling someone for 40 sec is not skill, I'm sorry.
Want to make 8 vs. 30's possible? Design better maps and incentives that discourages zergs. Running around in packs of 30-40 being the optimal strategy is just poor design. This is GW2's biggest issue and makes WvW unsatisfying.
Keeps should fucking mean something more than an object to swap every 15min. Force the majority of the players to defend them and let the smaller and more skilled groups handle the open field objectives and combat.
all this shit talk about "discouraging" zergs...anything with large player counts will have zergs. it's the natural behavior of players to run in large packs. if it's possible, it'll happen. first of all DAoC, GW2 and likely TESO all have other means of success and other ways for players to get by. they all allow for mini zergs and solo feats to help in the fight(Presumably TESO will). the only game with a bad implementation of this kind of large scale pvp is TSW.
discourage what every god damn player who logs into your game is going to seek to do without fail and WILL DO???? right.
the above post describes Fusang more than WvWvW. the only things that get swapped on any such interval is supply camps, if there's lots of fighting. and they already allow for and reward defending the keeps. maybe you're in a shit grouping.
Long duration CC is and will always be terrible. Controlling someone for 40 sec is not skill, I'm sorry.
Want to make 8 vs. 30's possible? Design better maps and incentives that discourages zergs. Running around in packs of 30-40 being the optimal strategy is just poor design. This is GW2's biggest issue and makes WvW unsatisfying.
Keeps should fucking mean something more than an object to swap every 15min. Force the majority of the players to defend them and let the smaller and more skilled groups handle the open field objectives and combat.
problem is saying zerging is poor design of devs is a mistake, the problem is teh players because most of people will zerg for the sake of it, any organized group know they can cover a hell more ground if they divide and send several groups to several points, the zerg can win agasint the small group? they can but then you have only one zone problem and you zre winning overrall and having a place to fight in is better, I do see people complaining the W3 have no point and I never agree
for the OP you did some have some nice opnions but most of then I don't agree much, also I sure do recomend you just send then this via e-mail or post on they sugestion forum, here you are or asking to be flamed, want to know what most of people here want to know, but in the very end you will be sure no devs will read.
my opnion is they will amke a game will be so damn generic people will flame the damn thing to the ground also from what I know from bethesda devs teh game will crash every hour then after a year or 2 they will fix most bugs, but you will get a crash sometimes, so i'm not expecting much from it
Jtcgs You're wrong, I played on mordred. It had exactly the same pvp setup as darktide. What you are referring to is core servers, but daoc also had full pve and full pvp servers.
all this shit talk about "discouraging" zergs...anything with large player counts will have zergs. it's the natural behavior of players to run in large packs. if it's possible, it'll happen.
Except in those games it didnt. Amazingly enough, when you make classes with deep skillsets, people will PvP for the challenge, games with limited class structures place in things like "sieges" and PvP zones with objectives because they require a carrot on a stick to get people to do things and they force people into groups.
There was plenty of non-zerg PvP pre DaoC. Sure there was some, but its forced now.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Great overview of the history of faction based pvp.
I tend to disagee with long duration CCs and it was one of the big problems with DAOC. A single person being able to AOE mez people for 10+ seconds was ridiculous. Fights just came down to whoever landed their AOE CC first.
Zerging just needs to be accepted for these types of modes. Even in a skill based twitch game like Planetside, the zerg will usually win. I know people like to fantasize about being the 300 Spartans vs 20 000 persians, but that isn't likely to happen in any sort of game that is balanced, which is needed if it is to appeal to large numbers of people.
Zerging can be halted by forcing people to spread out to hold map objectives, and having very large maps like DAOC. This is one major issue in GW2 - maps are wall to small so there is no way a small group can take a keep before it is reinforced.
Another thing DAOC did great was having completely distinct factions. I know for budget and balance reasons we are not going to see realm specific pve and classes. Races, armor sets, architecture and anything else that won't effect balance should be unique to create that sense of realm pride. Planetside 2 has done a good job here.
I suppose it depends on what type of progression you are talking about. If it's a gear grind for PvP specific stats then no, that's quite possibly the worst thing to happen to MMO's. PvP is about the players and their skill, not a player trying to overcome someone elses gear.
Originally posted by Quesa I suppose it depends on what type of progression you are talking about. If it's a gear grind for PvP specific stats then no, that's quite possibly the worst thing to happen to MMO's. PvP is about the players and their skill, not a player trying to overcome someone elses gear.
i agree with this above but want to add to also that DAOC i felt did it right pre TOA where you would just have a set of player crafted 100% quality gear and your realm abilities is what gave you the edge instead of gear grinding for months. Though it was still a grind it at least made your toon much different than the next guy of your class and it was fun. People would hate my reaver with a passion on tower defense games because I would thorn weed field them then hit the pbaoe lifetap (UQToS) and sometimes if they werent paying attention drop the entire 8 man . This was a lot of fun to me but any smart player seeing a reaver would just avoid getting bunched up in a snare with damage.
Ive always been a avid defender of added pvp abilites you earn for the more you pvp because it opens up new gameplay options to you . I HATE gear grinds with a passion but sometimes they are honestly needed , just look at that trainwreck of a pvp system in both wow and rift to see. Imagine if there was no pvp gear and you just had raiders abile to get the best gear. They would walk into a pvp battleground or skirmish and demolish everyone that isnt a raider and that would be unfair to people who just want to pvp and not raid or do dungeon heroics etc.
I think TESO will have pvp personally though no info is available yet about it. But you have to think whats going to keep raiders at bay in pvp zones when they get bored of raiding ? Guild Wars 2 did that part of the game right because all gear could be earned in both pvp and end game pve. I just hope they do the same but they are already talking about raids being end game in TESO.
With exception of long term CC, like others said, if it is like the common CC it would suck, if its like WAR then it could work marvelously, plus they could add a immune effect after someone takes a CC to stop abusing like in GW2
"It has potential" -Second most used phrase on existence "It sucks" -Most used phrase on existence
You are arguing open world PvP based on a game that did not have open world PvP...
DaoC was NOT open world. Asherons Call and Ultima Online was OPEN WORLD PvP.
It means you can PvP EVERYWHERE because you can go EVERYWHERE. And no, DaoC was not the best PvP game, I dont know of a single person that played on Darktide in Asherons Call that would say DaoC limited PvPing zones was the best, if anything the game handicapped PvPing by making it grouped based like PvE instances. The very idea of player skill went away and it became a group zerg fest where the side with the most people and best gear wins.
Long gone are the days of two people fighting for 20-30 minutes because they are SKILLED...we are left with 10 second long fights and gank fests.
Who knows, maybe Black Desert will do "DaoC" style zerg PvP the "right way"...outside the closed confines it was placed into and dumped into an actual OPEN WORLD...either way, you wont get it in TESO, they already anounced that the factions will be just like in DaoC, closed to other faction players, and PvP will have its set "zones".
Amen. I missed out on DaoC, although I hear tales that in it's prime it was an awesome game. I tried Asheron's Call when it was released, but sadly never liked it.
I started Playing Ultima Online in November 1997, and was seriously hooked. You were afraid to go out with your good gear, you had reasons for grouping with friends. The PvP was spectacular. Large groups of reds dominating the dungeons, until the blues could round up enough to go face them. Huge dungeon fights, avoid monsters and fighting through all levels, with some fights lasting over an hour. That was good pvp. Sadly I haven't seen much PvP like that since. Darkfall tried, but I think it missed the mark. I doubt we will ever see a game like UO ever again.
Cronius Sage said on that last video you can't get the best gear purely by pve. To have the best you need a combination of pvp,pve AND crafting. I'm hoping you just need 2 of the 3 though, don't want to put up with all the drama and politics you get with progression end game pve.
Apvp (area pvp) is not the same as Wpvp. We've seen this with swtor, tsw, and gw2. It just doesn't scrathc the itch of the unexpected.
I can't wait to check out the combat systems and the itemization, but this stuff is going to have to amazing, not just good in order for TESO's Apvp to have any staying power.
Originally posted by Quesa I suppose it depends on what type of progression you are talking about. If it's a gear grind for PvP specific stats then no, that's quite possibly the worst thing to happen to MMO's. PvP is about the players and their skill, not a player trying to overcome someone elses gear.
Well, to a point. Otherwise there is no reason to have any gear whatsoever. Though my preference would be to have less of a gap between good gear and incredible gear.
Still, if someone is wearing good armor then that armor should protect. The issue comes from someone just wearing good gear and then standing there invulnerable. That should never happen. Heck, no player should ever be invulnerable, even from level 1 players. Or several of them in any case.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Originally posted by Quesa I suppose it depends on what type of progression you are talking about. If it's a gear grind for PvP specific stats then no, that's quite possibly the worst thing to happen to MMO's. PvP is about the players and their skill, not a player trying to overcome someone elses gear.
Well, to a point. Otherwise there is no reason to have any gear whatsoever. Though my preference would be to have less of a gap between good gear and incredible gear.
Still, if someone is wearing good armor then that armor should protect. The issue comes from someone just wearing good gear and then standing there invulnerable. That should never happen. Heck, no player should ever be invulnerable, even from level 1 players. Or several of them in any case.
To each their own.
The argument for PvP gear through a grind is always proped up on the fact that they want something to go for. When you ask these people if they would accept cosmetic gifts through PvP, many of them say "no". That's where the argument breaks down. PvP should be just that, Player vs. Player. If you have a gear grind whih we saw in the beginnings of games like WoW and Rift, you are really just participating in PvGear until you equalize it through the grind.
The proposal from GW2, when it first started, was that everyone would have the equalized stats for their class (at least that's what I remembered) and that's the proper way to go if you truly want a competitive battlefield. This also has the positive effect of making it easier to balance out skills for PvP instead of having to rebalance everything if one class gets a new drop.
If the OP is suggesting skills through PvP, I suppose I could get on board as long as they make no real impact on PvP. I want Players to play Players, not Players to fight other players Gear. That's not PvP.
Edit: Obviously for world PvP, things can't be this way unless you're prepaired to adjust everything in the event of PvP combat starting.
The argument for PvP gear through a grind is always proped up on the fact that they want something to go for. When you ask these people if they would accept cosmetic gifts through PvP, many of them say "no". That's where the argument breaks down. PvP should be just that, Player vs. Player. If you have a gear grind whih we saw in the beginnings of games like WoW and Rift, you are really just participating in PvGear until you equalize it through the grind.
The proposal from GW2, when it first started, was that everyone would have the equalized stats for their class (at least that's what I remembered) and that's the proper way to go if you truly want a competitive battlefield. This also has the positive effect of making it easier to balance out skills for PvP instead of having to rebalance everything if one class gets a new drop.
If the OP is suggesting skills through PvP, I suppose I could get on board as long as they make no real impact on PvP. I want Players to play Players, not Players to fight other players Gear. That's not PvP.
Edit: Obviously for world PvP, things can't be this way unless you're prepaired to adjust everything in the event of PvP combat starting.
Well, it is player against player. And what they bring to the table as far as tools to help them succeed. I just think gear should be a little less of the decider but should still be a part of the toolset that the player can put together. However, If the whole idea is for people to get gear so they can do harder encounters (pvp or pve) so they can get better gear to repeat the process, then that buys into the whole "reward me! reward me!" mentality.
I'm just not for gear progression being the goal as opposed to a means to an end. And that end, that meaningful progression, other than perhaps alternate advancement should be your mark upon the world. what you do in the world.
but then again, are we talking about mmo as "world" where players make their mark and create their legacy or are we talking about mmo as "game" where it's all about "events and rewards and tokens, etc?"
I'm even against separation of pvp and pve gear. I think it's very artifical, shallow and pointless.
If an npc troll hits you and a player hits you why should one protect more and another less?
As far as gear, it should give positives and negatives. "light" gear really should allow the player to move quickly but offer some but small protection if they get hit. Heavy gear should offer a lot of protection but should weigh the player down a bit more and be a bit more cumbersome. One of the things I love about Dark Souls is that my Knight can take a lot of damage but really does move slowly and has to connect perfectly or else the light armored enemies just bounce around and wait to get their jabs in. If I do connect with them they take a lot of damage.
So in that case, the gear you choose can either reflect your playstyle or inform your playstyle.
Otherwise, if gear is just cosmetic let's eliminate it all together. Player can pick their "look" and then hack at each other to their heart's content.
I believe players should have positives and negatives. I dont' really believe in the idea of perfect balance but then again I'm not a huge fan of GW2. I like it well enough but it's not really a game I want to log into each day. And then again, as you say, to each his own.
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Comments
DOAC had the best squirmish battles. Zergs and big battles were mostly on the weekend...
The phun was in the day to day incidental PvP...
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
Let's agree to disagree about the CC. I find getting CCed a bunch of times (even if it's for a short time) much more frustrating/infuriating than getting CCed once for a longer time (as long as I know I will have my immunity when it ends).
But why keeps instead of kills? That would surely lead to keep trading and players making zergs and circling each other.
DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann
Your opinion^ is because of a lack of understanding.... a 40 second CC always had a way out. There were all kinds of counters to remove it, if you so choosed to build your char that way.
It all comes down to how skill your group was and how in sync they are.
"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."
-Nariusseldon
This is by far the most fun thing I have ever done in WoW. Mind control enemies and throw them in the lava in BRM. Back in the day when brm was the PvP hotspot.
DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann
I just wanted to pull this point out. I'm really curious, but doubtful this is going to happen the way players would hope. If you guys recall, they have this "mega-server" thing going on where everyone is instances on one giant server. I'm not sure how it's going to factor into PvP, but I'd guess "not well".
I seriously doubt any possibility of rivals and arch-enemies given the instancing design. If there's 2 million players and you get tossed into instances like they say, it seems you might never see the same players again(unless they are on your friends list).
I don't know, maybe I haven't heard enough detail about how their system works, but it sounds like one giant, sloppy mess of 50 instances per zone/area.
As a PvE'r I could get on board with this idea. It wouldn't screw PvE (I hate 2 second fears/mez argh) and provide more tactical use of it in PvP.
Good list OP.
You are arguing open world PvP based on a game that did not have open world PvP...
DaoC was NOT open world. Asherons Call and Ultima Online was OPEN WORLD PvP.
It means you can PvP EVERYWHERE because you can go EVERYWHERE. And no, DaoC was not the best PvP game, I dont know of a single person that played on Darktide in Asherons Call that would say DaoC limited PvPing zones was the best, if anything the game handicapped PvPing by making it grouped based like PvE instances. The very idea of player skill went away and it became a group zerg fest where the side with the most people and best gear wins.
Long gone are the days of two people fighting for 20-30 minutes because they are SKILLED...we are left with 10 second long fights and gank fests.
Who knows, maybe Black Desert will do "DaoC" style zerg PvP the "right way"...outside the closed confines it was placed into and dumped into an actual OPEN WORLD...either way, you wont get it in TESO, they already anounced that the factions will be just like in DaoC, closed to other faction players, and PvP will have its set "zones".
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Long duration CC is and will always be terrible. Controlling someone for 40 sec is not skill, I'm sorry.
Want to make 8 vs. 30's possible? Design better maps and incentives that discourages zergs. Running around in packs of 30-40 being the optimal strategy is just poor design. This is GW2's biggest issue and makes WvW unsatisfying.
Keeps should fucking mean something more than an object to swap every 15min. Force the majority of the players to defend them and let the smaller and more skilled groups handle the open field objectives and combat.
all this shit talk about "discouraging" zergs...anything with large player counts will have zergs. it's the natural behavior of players to run in large packs. if it's possible, it'll happen. first of all DAoC, GW2 and likely TESO all have other means of success and other ways for players to get by. they all allow for mini zergs and solo feats to help in the fight(Presumably TESO will). the only game with a bad implementation of this kind of large scale pvp is TSW.
discourage what every god damn player who logs into your game is going to seek to do without fail and WILL DO???? right.
the above post describes Fusang more than WvWvW. the only things that get swapped on any such interval is supply camps, if there's lots of fighting. and they already allow for and reward defending the keeps. maybe you're in a shit grouping.
problem is saying zerging is poor design of devs is a mistake, the problem is teh players because most of people will zerg for the sake of it, any organized group know they can cover a hell more ground if they divide and send several groups to several points, the zerg can win agasint the small group? they can but then you have only one zone problem and you zre winning overrall and having a place to fight in is better, I do see people complaining the W3 have no point and I never agree
for the OP you did some have some nice opnions but most of then I don't agree much, also I sure do recomend you just send then this via e-mail or post on they sugestion forum, here you are or asking to be flamed, want to know what most of people here want to know, but in the very end you will be sure no devs will read.
my opnion is they will amke a game will be so damn generic people will flame the damn thing to the ground also from what I know from bethesda devs teh game will crash every hour then after a year or 2 they will fix most bugs, but you will get a crash sometimes, so i'm not expecting much from it
You're wrong, I played on mordred. It had exactly the same pvp setup as darktide. What you are referring to is core servers, but daoc also had full pve and full pvp servers.
Except in those games it didnt. Amazingly enough, when you make classes with deep skillsets, people will PvP for the challenge, games with limited class structures place in things like "sieges" and PvP zones with objectives because they require a carrot on a stick to get people to do things and they force people into groups.
There was plenty of non-zerg PvP pre DaoC. Sure there was some, but its forced now.
I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson
Great overview of the history of faction based pvp.
I tend to disagee with long duration CCs and it was one of the big problems with DAOC. A single person being able to AOE mez people for 10+ seconds was ridiculous. Fights just came down to whoever landed their AOE CC first.
Zerging just needs to be accepted for these types of modes. Even in a skill based twitch game like Planetside, the zerg will usually win. I know people like to fantasize about being the 300 Spartans vs 20 000 persians, but that isn't likely to happen in any sort of game that is balanced, which is needed if it is to appeal to large numbers of people.
Zerging can be halted by forcing people to spread out to hold map objectives, and having very large maps like DAOC. This is one major issue in GW2 - maps are wall to small so there is no way a small group can take a keep before it is reinforced.
Another thing DAOC did great was having completely distinct factions. I know for budget and balance reasons we are not going to see realm specific pve and classes. Races, armor sets, architecture and anything else that won't effect balance should be unique to create that sense of realm pride. Planetside 2 has done a good job here.
Of course I don't want a gear grind. I want something similar to this: http://darkageofcamelot.com/content/realm-abilities
DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann
i agree with this above but want to add to also that DAOC i felt did it right pre TOA where you would just have a set of player crafted 100% quality gear and your realm abilities is what gave you the edge instead of gear grinding for months. Though it was still a grind it at least made your toon much different than the next guy of your class and it was fun. People would hate my reaver with a passion on tower defense games because I would thorn weed field them then hit the pbaoe lifetap (UQToS) and sometimes if they werent paying attention drop the entire 8 man . This was a lot of fun to me but any smart player seeing a reaver would just avoid getting bunched up in a snare with damage.
Ive always been a avid defender of added pvp abilites you earn for the more you pvp because it opens up new gameplay options to you . I HATE gear grinds with a passion but sometimes they are honestly needed , just look at that trainwreck of a pvp system in both wow and rift to see. Imagine if there was no pvp gear and you just had raiders abile to get the best gear. They would walk into a pvp battleground or skirmish and demolish everyone that isnt a raider and that would be unfair to people who just want to pvp and not raid or do dungeon heroics etc.
I think TESO will have pvp personally though no info is available yet about it. But you have to think whats going to keep raiders at bay in pvp zones when they get bored of raiding ? Guild Wars 2 did that part of the game right because all gear could be earned in both pvp and end game pve. I just hope they do the same but they are already talking about raids being end game in TESO.
Surprisingly, I see myself agreeing with the OP
With exception of long term CC, like others said, if it is like the common CC it would suck, if its like WAR then it could work marvelously, plus they could add a immune effect after someone takes a CC to stop abusing like in GW2
"It has potential"
-Second most used phrase on existence
"It sucks"
-Most used phrase on existence
Amen. I missed out on DaoC, although I hear tales that in it's prime it was an awesome game. I tried Asheron's Call when it was released, but sadly never liked it.
I started Playing Ultima Online in November 1997, and was seriously hooked. You were afraid to go out with your good gear, you had reasons for grouping with friends. The PvP was spectacular. Large groups of reds dominating the dungeons, until the blues could round up enough to go face them. Huge dungeon fights, avoid monsters and fighting through all levels, with some fights lasting over an hour. That was good pvp. Sadly I haven't seen much PvP like that since. Darkfall tried, but I think it missed the mark. I doubt we will ever see a game like UO ever again.
Sage said on that last video you can't get the best gear purely by pve. To have the best you need a combination of pvp,pve AND crafting. I'm hoping you just need 2 of the 3 though, don't want to put up with all the drama and politics you get with progression end game pve.
Apvp (area pvp) is not the same as Wpvp. We've seen this with swtor, tsw, and gw2. It just doesn't scrathc the itch of the unexpected.
I can't wait to check out the combat systems and the itemization, but this stuff is going to have to amazing, not just good in order for TESO's Apvp to have any staying power.
Well, to a point. Otherwise there is no reason to have any gear whatsoever. Though my preference would be to have less of a gap between good gear and incredible gear.
Still, if someone is wearing good armor then that armor should protect. The issue comes from someone just wearing good gear and then standing there invulnerable. That should never happen. Heck, no player should ever be invulnerable, even from level 1 players. Or several of them in any case.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
To each their own.
The argument for PvP gear through a grind is always proped up on the fact that they want something to go for. When you ask these people if they would accept cosmetic gifts through PvP, many of them say "no". That's where the argument breaks down. PvP should be just that, Player vs. Player. If you have a gear grind whih we saw in the beginnings of games like WoW and Rift, you are really just participating in PvGear until you equalize it through the grind.
The proposal from GW2, when it first started, was that everyone would have the equalized stats for their class (at least that's what I remembered) and that's the proper way to go if you truly want a competitive battlefield. This also has the positive effect of making it easier to balance out skills for PvP instead of having to rebalance everything if one class gets a new drop.
If the OP is suggesting skills through PvP, I suppose I could get on board as long as they make no real impact on PvP. I want Players to play Players, not Players to fight other players Gear. That's not PvP.
Edit: Obviously for world PvP, things can't be this way unless you're prepaired to adjust everything in the event of PvP combat starting.
Well, it is player against player. And what they bring to the table as far as tools to help them succeed. I just think gear should be a little less of the decider but should still be a part of the toolset that the player can put together. However, If the whole idea is for people to get gear so they can do harder encounters (pvp or pve) so they can get better gear to repeat the process, then that buys into the whole "reward me! reward me!" mentality.
I'm just not for gear progression being the goal as opposed to a means to an end. And that end, that meaningful progression, other than perhaps alternate advancement should be your mark upon the world. what you do in the world.but then again, are we talking about mmo as "world" where players make their mark and create their legacy or are we talking about mmo as "game" where it's all about "events and rewards and tokens, etc?"
I'm even against separation of pvp and pve gear. I think it's very artifical, shallow and pointless.
If an npc troll hits you and a player hits you why should one protect more and another less?
As far as gear, it should give positives and negatives. "light" gear really should allow the player to move quickly but offer some but small protection if they get hit. Heavy gear should offer a lot of protection but should weigh the player down a bit more and be a bit more cumbersome. One of the things I love about Dark Souls is that my Knight can take a lot of damage but really does move slowly and has to connect perfectly or else the light armored enemies just bounce around and wait to get their jabs in. If I do connect with them they take a lot of damage.
So in that case, the gear you choose can either reflect your playstyle or inform your playstyle.
Otherwise, if gear is just cosmetic let's eliminate it all together. Player can pick their "look" and then hack at each other to their heart's content.
I believe players should have positives and negatives. I dont' really believe in the idea of perfect balance but then again I'm not a huge fan of GW2. I like it well enough but it's not really a game I want to log into each day. And then again, as you say, to each his own.
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
My YouTube MMO PvP Channel
Philosophy of MMO Game Design