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!

ESO devs: If you want to get open world PvP "right" read this...

1356

Comments

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,452Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Quesa
    Originally posted by Sovrath
     

    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.

     

  • Baramos79Baramos79 Indianapolis, INPosts: 73Member
    Logged in to say great post boxsnd,  you hit the nail on the head!
  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,255Member Uncommon
    post videos OP....

    image

  • xKingdomxxKingdomx SydneyPosts: 1,541Member
    I wish GW2 integrated the WvW into their PvE environment, so you have safe pure PvE zones, but there are wars between different areas, something like TERA's political system, without the voting and shat.

    How much WoW could a WoWhater hate, if a WoWhater could hate WoW?
    As much WoW as a WoWhater would, if a WoWhater could hate WoW.

  • SereliskSerelisk somewhere, NYPosts: 836Member
    Originally posted by Sovrath
    Originally posted by Quesa
    Originally posted by Sovrath
     

    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.

    I'm even against separation of pvp and pve gear. I think it's very artifical, shallow and pointless. 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 then that buys into the whole "reward me! reward me!" mentality.

    Additionally, why should there be a differentiation in any gear? If an npc troll hits you and a player hits you why should one protect more and another less?

    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?"

    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.

     

    @Sovrath

    Erhm, to clarify if you haven't actually played through GW2, the gear's not entirely equalized as in everyone gets one set of stats and then "Fight!". But there's maximum relative values associated with them. So if you have maximum (exotic) power vitality and toughness armor on, otherwise known as a soldier set, then someone else with a different looking set of armor with exotic level soldier stats will have the same values associated.

    But there's also maximum values and superior runes for entirely different sets of armor to coincide with specific builds like power/precision/crit or crit/healing/toughness or what have you. So in that way, the gear does reflect playstyle.You shouldn't be in the situation where someone's soldier set outclasses yours though if you did reach the supposed power ceiling. There's a whole other topic about Ascended gear but I'm not going to get into that. 

    @Quesa

    I think we're getting into muddied territory a bit: The OP, in reference to GW2, is talking specifically about WvWvW which isn't really PvP and I don't believe should be treated like it in the same light. However, I still think what you said about skills is spot on because it should still be about the content, not playing for the reward. Or rather, the goal/reward of WvW should be winning, not getting a power enhancement. That was part of the reason for taking out, as the OP referred to them as, "Relics". 

    @OP

    I'm in agreement with some others in this thread that the things you say encourage zergplay are really not as detrimental as you're making them out to be. For example; how does having an objective based gametype favor numbers? Unless you're specifically referring to Keeps (not towers, sentry nodes or supply camps) in which case... why is it bad that a lot of players focus on the biggest and strategically most important objects on the map?

    Also, how does the holy trinity allow for more combat scenarios or ways to fight? In almost every circumstance, in most games that have the holy trinity, every encounter is the same. That's where terms like rotation come from; efficiency in executing what is very predictable combat. Each of the things you listed following the comment on the trinity is possible and happen very frequently in GW2 and probably each of the other games so I don't really understand your point here. 

     

  • cronius77cronius77 Fairfax, VAPosts: 1,347Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by ShakyMo
    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.

    thats really good to know not sure how i missed that one . I do not like to raid anymore its just too much drama with guilds nowadays and its not about skill its about who is the best equiped to do the best dps in most games. Im hoping for pvp progression like DAOC myself but I would not mind a small gear grind if it keeps me up to par with full on pve players that jump into pvp when they are bored of raiding. Crafting gear was awesome in DAOC also until TOA released but then it kinda took most of the templates away replacing them with artifacts. I would love to see it so you can choose between the three of crafting pvp and pve end game gear to be competitive without any different stats for pvp and pve etc. I hated SWTOR , Rift and WOW for this garbage all of them introduced.

  • boxsndboxsnd Kraxton, ARPosts: 438Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Serelisk

    @OP

    I'm in agreement with some others in this thread that the things you say encourage zergplay are really not as detrimental as you're making them out to be. For example; how does having an objective based gametype favor numbers? Unless you're specifically referring to Keeps (not towers, sentry nodes or supply camps) in which case... why is it bad that a lot of players focus on the biggest and strategically most important objects on the map?

    Also, how does the holy trinity allow for more combat scenarios or ways to fight? In almost every circumstance, in most games that have the holy trinity, every encounter is the same. That's where terms like rotation come from; efficiency in executing what is very predictable combat. Each of the things you listed following the comment on the trinity is possible and happen very frequently in GW2 and probably each of the other games so I don't really understand your point here. 

     

    The question is: Is PvP more efficient with a zerg or with a group?

    In DAoC killing enemies (progressing) as a veteran was much more efficient (and fun) as a group (or solo if stealth class), but as a new player it was more efficient to stay in a zerg. Taking relics was only possible with a huge zerg. Taking keeps could be done with either, depending on time/region/importance of the keep etc. There were always reasons to go out to RvR, even when your realm was getting absolutely destroyed.

     

    In GW2 the only thing that matters are the server scores in the end of the 2 weeks. If your server is far behind most of your server will get discouraged and log out / PvE, while the one server that is ahead it's population will constantly rise, thus making the matchup unbalanced. This may be fixed when they implement progression.

    The most efficient (and easiest) way to take keeps, towers etc is zerging. With a group you can take camps surely but taking keeps will take a long time and you will almost always get ambushed by the enemy zerg. Sure you may ninja a keep here and there, but after a few deaths to the enemy zerg most people will get frustrated and either log out or make a zerg of their own.

     

    The holy trinity allows a single group to be more self sufficient. It's not a matter of 1 group + 1 group > 2 groups anymore. It's more complex. Also why would GW2 PvP be less predictable than any MMO with trinity PvP?

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Long duration CC is the opposite of skillful, it is in fact very cheap and doesn't discourage a zerg at all. Instead you get zergs of CC, which is even less fun than getting bowled over by a zerg.
  • boxsndboxsnd Kraxton, ARPosts: 438Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Long duration CC is the opposite of skillful, it is in fact very cheap and doesn't discourage a zerg at all. Instead you get zergs of CC, which is even less fun than getting bowled over by a zerg.

    You couldn't be more wrong.

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  • loulakiloulaki PatrasPosts: 918Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    So what is the key of creating a great open world PvP?

    1) permanent progression which is only achieved through open world PvP kills (primary objective) and taking keeps (secondary objective, much slower than kills). Progression should be endless or extremely hard to reach the max rank. It should be interesting: not +1 str per rank etc, give us PvP-only skills that can't be unlocked with PvE.

    2) A dungeon like Darkness Falls to fight over

    3) The game should be optimized for large open world battles (without culling)

    4) Large duration crowd control system, large groups (8 players is optimal), no "downed mechanic", yes to the  trinity(healers,tanks,dps) to allow for many different playstyles (zerging, competitive group vs group, soloing, small group, stealthing etc)

    5) Relics (that don't get hacked easily) to fight over 

    6) Names of enemies visible, same enemies all the time (to build rivalries and realm pride, and to make the whole war feel important)

    7) Make defending keeps much more rewarding than trading them with your enemies.

    8) DON'T force us to PvE (much) to be able to compete in PvP.

    9) The skill system should allow skilled players to overpower zergs of lesser skilled players. If twitch.tv existed back in 2002, DAoC would be the most watched game by far. It was insanely competitive. But if the skill cap is as low as WoW's/GW2's it will never happen.

    well just to add my opinion based on the OP

    1) i agree about the feeling of progression and the available PvP skills, fe if you lose the rank you lose the ability to use the skill, how you lose the rank ? from deaths ! what skill could be ? being able to be commander/leader, to summon siege machines and for sure cosmetics, there the GW2 lacks (they said they will change it), other games offered statistics improves which was even worse..

    2) i have seen that in Aion, it was really bad and builded bigger gasp between the loser and the winner ...

    3) on this i agree, only EVE is taking serious on that though, i hope Anet will succeed ...

    4) really are you serious ? this is totally wrong and open the doors for exploits large duration for CC its terrible mechanic, if there is a zerg you cant win it, its simple ..! and all this about trinity again its faulse check this video, and if you search in the youtube vs zerg in gw2 you will see many videos

    5) i agree on this point although the fight against hackers/exploiters its constantly

    6) i agree on this too !!! also the chat between the enemies ..! thist started with WoW and in keeps in GW2 in the fear of abusive language which is faulse cause there are already banned words ... and report mechanics through screenshots ...

    7) only in Warhammer online i have seen this feature ... i hope i wont see that again !

    8) well that was major problem in Aion .. in GW2 you need only one week of hardcore gaming to make a set of exotics : )

    9) this statement about DaoC its extreme, it reminds me and my friends in AgeofEmpires II we were playing lan parties and it was awesome and we had hot competitions, but when we got in online games we were struggle to stick through medium rank players : /    as i see the skill in GW2 its really big cause beyond the builds and skill rotations you use you have to be able to use the enviroment and to dodge attacks or block like we see in AoC or in TESO (i hope.. ) was there in DaoC mechanics to avoid enemy attacks ? or the fights were just static like in WoW ?  personally the Lineage II had much more better and intensive PvP system ....  and i miss it on its early stage with the war declaration between guilds the appointed sieges and the open world system with karma ....

    image

  • DiSpLiFFDiSpLiFF Toronto, ONPosts: 605Member

    The key to good open world pvp is simple. Don't put in battlegrounds or any sort of instanced pvp. Once you do that why would anyone choose open world pvp when rewards are much easier to get in battlegrounds. 

    I think it is fine ot have pvp and pve gear, just make the distinction. This was something that WoW did very well after introducing pvp gear. 

  • Slapshot1188Slapshot1188 Boca Raton, FLPosts: 4,491Member Uncommon

    One key to DAoC frontiers was that it encompassed PvP AND PvE.   Yes there was Darknessfalls (awesome feature!) but XP was also increased in the frontier.   Sure you could level to 50 in the safe zones and never have to PvP, but you could also sneak out through the gates and try some frontier PvE for increased rewards.  It made the game feel more alive and increased that feeling of a Realm at war.   The damn Albion bastards were lurking out there, possibly behind the next tree....

     

    Auto leveling to 50 in the PvP area would appear to preclude that from being a feature in ESO...

     

     

    "I should point out that no other company has shipped out a beta on a disc before this." - Official Mortal Online Lead Community Moderator

    Starvault's reponse to criticism related to having a handful of players as the official "test" team for a supposed MMO: "We've just have another 10ish folk kind enough to voulenteer added tot the test team" (SIC) This explains much about the state of the game :-)

  • evilastroevilastro EdinburghPosts: 4,270Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Long duration CC is the opposite of skillful, it is in fact very cheap and doesn't discourage a zerg at all. Instead you get zergs of CC, which is even less fun than getting bowled over by a zerg.

    You couldn't be more wrong.

     Except I'm not, its why most games moved away from long duration CC in PvP.  I played DAOC and the CC was a joke. So very cheap, but there were no other alternatives for PvP at the time. Don't get me wrong, it did other stuff well, but CC was not one of them.

    Back in EQ2 when they first introduced PvP and I could CC large groups as my Illusionist while I picked them off one by one. That wasn't skillful, it was cheap, and I'm not too proud to admit it. There was nothing skillful about me targetting someone and clicking a button that took them out of the action while I killed their friends. Its about as sporting as hunting a deer with no legs.

  • AeonbladesAeonblades Home, GAPosts: 2,083Member

    A little behind, but really good post OP, you hit the nail on the head of 90% of the issues with other games that were similar.

    The only thing I believe I like the idea of is leveled items from ToA, but they should NOT take months of camping or "activation" to aquire. It should flow naturally, as you level and PvP your weapon/shield/armor piece levels with you. Make it accessible to get, accessible to level. Do not make it necessary to have. Make it on par with other items of the level, but maybe give it inspectable lore, or a special graphic. Optional leveled items are fun, I enjoyed leveling them in EQ and to an extent DAoC after they made artifacts MUCH easier to level.

    Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
    Have played: You name it
    If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.

  • SatchoSatcho MontevideoPosts: 33Member Common

    As far as I understand, TESO does not have OWPvP... it has a specific area dedicated to PvP, much like GW2.

    Boooooooooooooorinnnnnnnnnnnng!

    If they gave us the chance to at least venture into other factions' lands, that would make for some interesting OWPvP. Having to go into a specific central area and be leveled to lvl 50 to PvP is a snooze. 

    I had some of the most fun OWPvP playing Lineage 2's second Chronicle... solo, in groups, GvG... image

  • WellzyCWellzyC Stillwater, MNPosts: 557Member Uncommon

     

     

    I love daoc CC, it was great.

     

    However I also loved early wow CC, long duration, but only 1 character can mezz 1 enemy, so having more than 1 CCer was really usefull.

    I think something like that would satisfy both sides of the argument.

    The way mmo's were: Community, Exploration, Character Development, Conquest.

    The way mmo's are now : Cut-Scenes,Cut-Scenes, solo Questing, Cut-Scenes...


    www.CeaselessGuild.com

  • boxsndboxsnd Kraxton, ARPosts: 438Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Long duration CC is the opposite of skillful, it is in fact very cheap and doesn't discourage a zerg at all. Instead you get zergs of CC, which is even less fun than getting bowled over by a zerg.

    You couldn't be more wrong.

     Except I'm not, its why most games moved away from long duration CC in PvP.  I played DAOC and the CC was a joke. So very cheap, but there were no other alternatives for PvP at the time. Don't get me wrong, it did other stuff well, but CC was not one of them.

    Back in EQ2 when they first introduced PvP and I could CC large groups as my Illusionist while I picked them off one by one. That wasn't skillful, it was cheap, and I'm not too proud to admit it. There was nothing skillful about me targetting someone and clicking a button that took them out of the action while I killed their friends. Its about as sporting as hunting a deer with no legs.

    The only people who hated the CC in DAoC were the baddies/newbies as they didn't understand it and didn't know how to use it to their advantage.

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  • SovrathSovrath Boston Area, MAPosts: 18,452Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Serelisk
     

    @Sovrath

    Erhm, to clarify if you haven't actually played through GW2, the gear's not entirely equalized as in everyone gets one set of stats and then "Fight!". But there's maximum relative values associated with them. So if you have maximum (exotic) power vitality and toughness armor on, otherwise known as a soldier set, then someone else with a different looking set of armor with exotic level soldier stats will have the same values associated.

    But there's also maximum values and superior runes for entirely different sets of armor to coincide with specific builds like power/precision/crit or crit/healing/toughness or what have you. So in that way, the gear does reflect playstyle.You shouldn't be in the situation where someone's soldier set outclasses yours though if you did reach the supposed power ceiling. There's a whole other topic about Ascended gear but I'm not going to get into that. 

     

    Thanks, good to know! image

  • NibsNibs .Posts: 216Member Uncommon

    I loved DAoC CC once they fixed it.

    Initially it was a nightmare. Stuns were un-breakable and chainable. Midgard was rightly re-labelled 'Stungard'.

    Then they added ways to resist/diminish CC (determination) and to break it if it did land (purge, cure mez spells). They shortened the duration of stuns and, most importantly, added an immunity timer when the CC broke.

    This made CC a tactical decision. Hit them with a root or mez first to see if you can get some to blow their purges. Then hit them with the stun.

    And god help anyone who broke your perfectly timed and placed AE mez: 'Grats, noob, you just granted them all immunity!'.

    I found this far more acceptable than the current trend of being CCed for 3 seconds every 4 seconds. Longer CC also gave me a chance to take a breathe, survey the situation and plan what I'd do a minute when I came out of it.

    The individual TTK was also longer in DAoC. This meant that in a 1 on 1 fight being stunned didn't guarantee your death. Nowadays if the rogue/assassin stuns you for 4 seconds that's more than enough time to make the rest of the fight un-winnable for you without outside interferance.

     

  • Eol-Eol- houston, TXPosts: 274Member

    I agree with a lot of what was said, but to be fair, pre-ToA had problems too. Mez was the king of battles, and whoever got off their AoE mez first usually won. Realm rank became not just a nice addition, but absolutely vital to PvP success; new level 50s were cannon fodder in RvR and that turned off a lot of casual players, who were leaving the game even before ToA drove them away.

    Also, while its nice to have different classes with different abilities in different realms, it creates a balance nightmare. DAoC was never balanced. Not even close. It just became a never-ending nerf contest, as some classes became FotM and were eventually replaced by others. People like the idea of different classes with different abilities, but they dont face the reality that balancing those classes across realms is inherently almost impossible. I hope they stick with an elder scrolls approach, where all abilities and classes are available to all realms, and its just a matter of what class you choose and how you spend your points/skill up. Its is hard enough to balance the basic classes (fighter, thief, healer, mage) in PvE and PvP much less balance different classes across realms.

    I like the elder scrolls and I loved DAoC (despite its flaws), so I hope they succeed. But people looking for a hardcore PvP game will probably be disappointed. Hardcore PvP types are the most vocal, but the big money is with the casual/semi-casual players because they vastly outnumber the hardcore types. They need to create a fun, balanced game that encourages endgame PvP but doesnt drive away the casual player in the process.

    Elladan - ESO (AD)
    Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
    Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
    Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
    Kili - WoW
    Eol - Lineage 2
    Camring - SWG
    Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC

  • ComanComan Hattem, AKPosts: 2,026Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    1) permanent progression which is only achieved through open world PvP kills (primary objective) and taking keeps (secondary objective, much slower than kills). Progression should be endless or extremely hard to reach the max rank. It should be interesting: not +1 str per rank etc, give us PvP-only skills that can't be unlocked with PvE.

    I like your post, but would the PvP only kills objective eventually not mean you have to be a DPS class to make proper progression in PvP? Healers, tanks, CC, etc type of clases would all have problems. How do you suggest they balance this? 

    If I heal someone. would I get this kill?

    Would I get a kill if I tank  someone while he is attacking me and he dies?

    If someone is frozen because of my CC would I get the kill?

     

  • Eol-Eol- houston, TXPosts: 274Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by evilastro
    Long duration CC is the opposite of skillful, it is in fact very cheap and doesn't discourage a zerg at all. Instead you get zergs of CC, which is even less fun than getting bowled over by a zerg.

    You couldn't be more wrong.

     Except I'm not, its why most games moved away from long duration CC in PvP.  I played DAOC and the CC was a joke. So very cheap, but there were no other alternatives for PvP at the time. Don't get me wrong, it did other stuff well, but CC was not one of them.

    Back in EQ2 when they first introduced PvP and I could CC large groups as my Illusionist while I picked them off one by one. That wasn't skillful, it was cheap, and I'm not too proud to admit it. There was nothing skillful about me targetting someone and clicking a button that took them out of the action while I killed their friends. Its about as sporting as hunting a deer with no legs.

    The only people who hated the CC in DAoC were the baddies/newbies as they didn't understand it and didn't know how to use it to their advantage.

    That is completely and totally wrong. Did you even play pre-ToA DAoC? AoE mez was devastating. The first group to get their AoE mez off usually won, and won easily. Bards and Healers especially dominated the outcome of PvP battles.  The idea that the only people who complained about it were baddies/newbies is just ludicrous. If that was the case, they wouldnt have added realm rank skills to dispel CC (which were vital to playing RvR) and they wouldnt have added diminishing returns. They changed those things because of massive complaints from the player base. You should have seen the forums! And most of those complaints were from experienced players, because the casual players usually didnt bother to post in the forums. But when you were in raid chat, you would hear those complaints over and over and over. Except maybe from Healers and Bards and Sorcerors, LOL.

    Elladan - ESO (AD)
    Camring - SWTOR (Ebon Hawk)
    Eol & Justinian - Rift (Faeblight)
    Ceol and Duri - LotRO (Landroval)
    Kili - WoW
    Eol - Lineage 2
    Camring - SWG
    Justinian (Nimue), Camring - DAoC

  • iseldieraiseldiera New York, NYPosts: 36Member

    I read posts on MMORPG.com forums every day at breakfast while sipping my coffee. I rarely log-in to make any comments or replies.

     

    The points raised in this post, however, require every person out there unhappy with the post-WoW mmo market to take a minute to login and reply with support to the Original Poster.

     

    I put my signature at every point he raised about the mistakes of the past attempts, and about how an open-world PvP world should be.

     

    Please devs, heed our calls, identify and utilize the best features of these ancient relics such as DaoC and Shadowbane - there is no need to reinvent the wheel - just take them and give them back to us. 

     

     

  • AeonbladesAeonblades Home, GAPosts: 2,083Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    The only people who hated the CC in DAoC were the baddies/newbies as they didn't understand it and didn't know how to use it to their advantage.

    I was waiting for someone to say this. Completely true. Those who hated CC either didn't know how to use it, or how to counter it. After immunity timers were added in, CC became a game inside of a game, lots of depth, and most people didn't know how to use that to their advantage.

    Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
    Have played: You name it
    If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.

  • boxsndboxsnd Kraxton, ARPosts: 438Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Coman
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    1) permanent progression which is only achieved through open world PvP kills (primary objective) and taking keeps (secondary objective, much slower than kills). Progression should be endless or extremely hard to reach the max rank. It should be interesting: not +1 str per rank etc, give us PvP-only skills that can't be unlocked with PvE.

    I like your post, but would the PvP only kills objective eventually not mean you have to be a DPS class to make proper progression in PvP? Healers, tanks, CC, etc type of clases would all have problems. How do you suggest they balance this? 

    If I heal someone. would I get this kill?

    Would I get a kill if I tank  someone while he is attacking me and he dies?

    If someone is frozen because of my CC would I get the kill?

     

    The progression is the same for all group members. It doesn't matter who made the kill or who did the most damage. It works like PvE exping but for PvP.

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

Sign In or Register to comment.