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!

The list

124678

Comments

  • cd3925cd3925 Spokane, WAPosts: 29Member

    1) Server stability- being able to handle the lag with many people on screen or in the area. If lower graphics help achieve this then I would rather make that sacrifice. 

    2) No visible always-on name tag. I DO want to be able to see their RR and also the character name in battle etc. I like the way Darkfall did this, you hover over the player to see their name. This allows people to actually hide in the terrain which adds much intensity and other ways to escape..

    3) Server / Faction Pride: No game has done this well since DAoC IMO. I will never forget when I went to buy the SI expansion at a local store. There was a lady there getting the same thing... we spoke and found out we were on the same server- only, she was friggen Wizzy Alb zergling!! And I was a Midy!!! At that point the conversation just sorta ended- its pretty funny to think about lol. No other game that I have played has ever brought this element to the game for me. Don't get me wrong, it wasn't a hostile encounter by any means. We just sorta had nothing more to say each other after that.

    4) CC: Yes as much as I hate being in a long mezz, this is needed. And for those who do not like it- Purge 3 ;-)

    5) Crafting economy: I like the idea of gear decay for this reason. I also hope that nothing can be better than player crafted gear. Loved DAoC crafting. MP gear with a 5pt OC- that's the $}{!t

    6) Large frontiers: No instance large frontiers like DAoC's old frontier. The choke points mentioned in other post's are certainly needed.
  • CluckingChickenCluckingChicken Calgary, ABPosts: 54Member
    I'll toss my two cents in.

    1. Give keeps/castles/objectives some actual individual purpose. To further explain, I want a reason to spend time in a captured structure aside from just defending it under siege. Aside from just a positional advantage, I want other reasons to capture a specific keep. "Hey guys, lets grab the keep up north, I want to use the special workshop it has", stuff like that.

    2. Stuff for people to do regardless of group size. As a primarily solo player, I was saddened by GW2's WvW. Aside from killing supply caravans, there wasnt much I could do alone, so I was forced to spend most of my time playing 'follow the commander icon zerg'. I think you should be able to contribute to your faction's cause without having to roam with a large group. Perhaps smaller objectives suited for 1-3 players would suffice. Make it so it wouldn't be worth the time for large groups to attack and hold these positions, but make them important enough that people arent flaming you for attacking them instead of the larger objectives.

    3. Scalable walls! If you played a short range or melee focused build in GW2, you were stuck chipping at the keep walls and avoiding defender AoEs if you werent using a siege weapon. I would rather climb up the walls and take out some of the enemy defenders on the wall to lessen the pressure on my allies below.

    4. A sort of "threat" system. The more kills or objectives a player captures without dying, the more their threat will increase. The higher the threat, the bigger of a reward you get for killing them. This would encourage players to gang up on the big PvP guilds instead of avoiding them and letting them run unchecked.

    5. A solid stealth system. I've always loved playing the sneaky class, but its rare that an MMO gets the mechanics right. A vigilant player should be able to catch a thief before he attacks, but spamming AoEs everywhere is a lame and lazy way to do it.
  • JostleJostle Bradenton, FLPosts: 63Member

    Okay, I'm finally going to write my list. Forgive the tablet text, I'll edit once my proper computer is up and running. Here we go.

    1) Cool crafting. Something wildly customizable (mechanically and aestheticly) without verticle progression. Rather than, say armor just being plain better going from iron to steel to mithril to adamantium, have armor that gives more protection but slows down endurance regeneration and another type that has light physical mitigation but is resistant to heat, and another with X bonus and Y drawback. Then, because that's not enough, have alloys. Meaning you can take some aracnium ingots and some mithril ingots and melt them together to make armor that is lightweight and resistant to poison. Ok, so that was mechanically. Aestheticly, the crafter should be able to unlock multiple skins. There should be a shared window between the crafter and his or her client in which they can agree on a specific skin for the weapon or armor, and the crafter can make it look that way. I am a big proponent of fostering human interaction in MMOs and this auction house bullshit isn't helping.

     

    2) Small, medium, and large things to fight over. Players should be able to "win" or "lose" within a play session. The older I get and the more responsibility I have, the more I believe this (and I'm not even old OR responsible yet). Having said that, those that invest more time in the game should accomplish more. Have crafting nodes to fight over. Dozens and dozens of them. Mines for metal, mills for wood, quarries for stone, groves for plantlife and alchemical reagents.

    Have small outposts to fight over with some inherent benefit like a crafting station with a bonus to efficiency or time to craft or quality or durability bonus. Perhaps a barracks that spawns NPC guards and high enough RR players can give them basic orders. Maybe a temple that acts as a forward graveyard to respawn at or telleport to given the right spell with a long cooldown. Or a warehouse for storing huge amounts of crafting mats required to lay siege to a keep. 

    Have keeps to fight over with inner and outer doors that are really hard to take.

    Have fortresses that are really, really hard to take.

    Have relics that are modular. Here, I'll say that again: have relics that are modular. Each state should have an associated relic that is split into 5 or 10 pieces or fragments. Fragments give a bonus to a whole faction when stored in keeps. Get all the fragments of a kind and combine them into a proper relic at your faction's fortress. Fragments should change hands often, relics should not. When a fortress is taken, the relic is sundered into fragments and scattered throughout the RvR zone for reacclimation.

    Ok, I went into more detail than I should have there, but the main thing is, you should have small, medium and large things to fight over.

    3) Longer duration. CCs that come with a price. Easy solution? Make CC channeled. Could be single-target, AoE or PBAoE, but make it channeled. This way the inflicter is rendered impotent as well, and interrupting him or her can break CC in addition to using anti-CC abilities like purge. Or something along those lines.

    4) make territory control independent of RvR progression. Give points for killing/debugging/healing/mitigating. Territory should have its own distinct and inherent benefits.

    5) The big one. Save the best for last and all that. Dwarves. Give them to me or I'm walking!

  • wicoclyawicoclya North Little Rock, ARPosts: 1Member

    Thank you for taking into consideration our thoughts/ideas. I was addicted to DAOC for 10+hours a day for about 5 years, making me lose so much sleep and gain 100 pounds haha...  I will list the things that kept me glued to this game over any other.

     

    1. a USER FRIENDLY guild system that updates with important guildie achievements like lvl 50 etc.. Daoc had a better one than i had ever seen... The guild system is an important aspect... I seen my guild almost as a big family.

     

    2. INTERUPTS. INTERUPTS. and INTERUPTS. This includes Moving while casting, Getting hit by spells to interupt, and forcing a caster to face someone. Want to make this game like WOW? or Warhammer? Make it so everyone can just run around and spam abilities button mashing. I am 100% for making it so you can interupt someone who is casting spells easily, but also give them in essense a 30 second cooldown Quickcast.

     

    3. Open world Battlegrounds for specific levels. With PvE capabilities inside for leveling etc... I think this and /xp off go hand in hand.

     

    4. Make the realms NOTACABLY DIFFERENT. I knew in DAOC that if i seen huge hammers, or shrooms, i knew i was about to fight hibs or mids.

     

    5. CC. This would make it so a well played 3 man group could take on a full group if they were smart/skilled players.  (AE MEZ, STUN,ROOT etc...)

     

    I could go on and on about this but you only told us to list 5 things :( priv message me if you want to hear some more.

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon

     


    Originally posted by MarkJacobs Folks,     Thanks for the feedback, please keep it coming. Over the next few weeks I'm going to be swamped with our next content push for MoO (I need to design 10 more levels and balance some other new ones) and getting things ready for our Kickstarter so I don't know how much time I've have to keep posting here. What I would love to see is you guys keep throwing things out there and then, when we have a really good sample, put up a poll and see what comes back. How does that sound to you all?    Again, thanks so much for the feedback, I really appreciate it. Mark
      

     

    Sounds good I look forward to the poll.


    Something else I liked in Daoc..when you got a relic from the enemy that wasn't the end, you had to bring that relic back to your realm before you could keep it. It was a huge pride boost for the realm. Good times. I'd love to have that in a game again.

    image

    What happens when you log off your characters????.....
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GFQhfhnjYMk
    Dark Age of Camelot

  • MaephistoMaephisto somewhere, DCPosts: 632Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    There are some good but also some really bad suggestions on this thread.

    I find this particular part of FO3 fiting.

    You speak very loudly on a couple of forums and (I have to admit) a good number of people agree with you. 

    I would like to know.....
    1. What games have you developed?
    2. What game development companies have you worked for in the past?
    3. What massive pvp systems have you developed that have been widely recieved as successful?
    4. What would you do with yourself if an "industry expert" told you your Ideas have no real basis in reality (.e. "have relics that are fought over that cannot be hacked.")
    5. On what basis do you form any of your "lists?"
    6. What would happen if  your "perfect ideas" were directly refuted by industry experts
    There is a reason "community managers" deal directly with us (including me), instead of the actual developers.  Because it is not a sound business practice to tell individuals they live in a fantasy world.

    image

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

    There are some good but also some really bad suggestions on this thread.

    I find this particular part of FO3 fiting.

    You speak very loudly on a couple of forums and (I have to admit) a good number of people agree with you. 

    I would like to know.....
    1. What games have you developed?
    2. What game development companies have you worked for in the past?
    3. What massive pvp systems have you developed that have been widely recieved as successful?
    4. What would you do with yourself if an "industry expert" told you your Ideas have no real basis in reality (.e. "have relics that are fought over that cannot be hacked.")
    5. On what basis do you form any of your "lists?"
    6. What would happen if  your "perfect ideas" were directly refuted by industry experts
    There is a reason "community managers" deal directly with us (including me), instead of the actual developers.  Because it is not a sound business practice to tell individuals they live in a fantasy world.

    You seem... upset. Why? 

     

    1. I never claimed my ideas were "perfect"

    2. I never claimed to be an expert.

    3. I have played a bit with DAoC private servers and can tell you that indeed it is pretty damn easy to make them  unhackable. Why do you think the DAoC relics were never hacked (at least on the servers I played) while the GW2 relics were getting hacked every day?

    4. Am I not allowed to have opinions and make lists?

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  • MaephistoMaephisto somewhere, DCPosts: 632Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by Maephisto
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    There are some good but also some really bad suggestions on this thread.

    I find this particular part of FO3 fiting.

    You speak very loudly on a couple of forums and (I have to admit) a good number of people agree with you. 

    I would like to know.....
    1. What games have you developed?
    2. What game development companies have you worked for in the past?
    3. What massive pvp systems have you developed that have been widely recieved as successful?
    4. What would you do with yourself if an "industry expert" told you your Ideas have no real basis in reality (.e. "have relics that are fought over that cannot be hacked.")
    5. On what basis do you form any of your "lists?"
    6. What would happen if  your "perfect ideas" were directly refuted by industry experts
    There is a reason "community managers" deal directly with us (including me), instead of the actual developers.  Because it is not a sound business practice to tell individuals they live in a fantasy world.

    You seem... upset. Why? 

     

    1. I never claimed my ideas were "perfect"

    2. I never claimed to be an expert.

    3. I have played a bit with DAoC private servers and can tell you that indeed it is pretty damn easy to make them  unhackable. Why do you think the DAoC relics were never hacked (at least on the servers I played) while the GW2 relics were getting hacked every day?

    4. Am I not allowed to have opinions and make lists?

    You forgot to say "U Mad Bro?"  (I am referring to your thread tiltes like "ESO devs. if you want to get PVP right......read this)

    I am simply saying, you are full of shit.  Those who believe thier views on how a MMO should be (wether it be PvE or PvP) are more than likely unfeasible or baseless in reality.

    The ideas we have for a "perfect MMO": are not always based on reality.  I would actually bet that what we think is intuitively a great idea for MMO's, is actually detrimental.

     

    EDIT:  I forgot to answer #3.  I have no real answer to this......I dont know.    Are you claiming the old DAOC relics werent hackable?  Maybe there wasnt the type of crowd back then that felt the need to hack a MMO?  Werent MMO's in those days considered niche?

    image

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

    There are some good but also some really bad suggestions on this thread.

    I find this particular part of FO3 fiting.

    You speak very loudly on a couple of forums and (I have to admit) a good number of people agree with you. 

    I would like to know.....
    1. What games have you developed?
    2. What game development companies have you worked for in the past?
    3. What massive pvp systems have you developed that have been widely recieved as successful?
    4. What would you do with yourself if an "industry expert" told you your Ideas have no real basis in reality (.e. "have relics that are fought over that cannot be hacked.")
    5. On what basis do you form any of your "lists?"
    6. What would happen if  your "perfect ideas" were directly refuted by industry experts
    There is a reason "community managers" deal directly with us (including me), instead of the actual developers.  Because it is not a sound business practice to tell individuals they live in a fantasy world.

    You seem... upset. Why? 

     

    1. I never claimed my ideas were "perfect"

    2. I never claimed to be an expert.

    3. I have played a bit with DAoC private servers and can tell you that indeed it is pretty damn easy to make them  unhackable. Why do you think the DAoC relics were never hacked (at least on the servers I played) while the GW2 relics were getting hacked every day?

    4. Am I not allowed to have opinions and make lists?

    You forgot to say "U Mad Bro?"  (I am referring to your thread tiltes like "ESO devs. if you want to get PVP right......read this)

    I am simply saying, you are full of shit.  Those who beilieve thier views on how a MMO should be (wether it be PvE or PvP) are more than likely unfeasible or baseless in reality.

    The ideas we have for a "perfect MMO": are not always based on reality.  I would actually bet that what we think is intuitively a great idea for MMO's is actually detrimental.

     

    EDIT:  I forgot to answer #3.  I have no real answer to this......I dont know.    Are you claiming the old DAOC relics werent hackable?  Maybe there wasnt the type of crowd back then that felt the need to hack a MMO?  Werent MMO's in those days considered niche?

    There were always hackers in daoc but I have never seen a relic get hacked. There is an admin command to "track" certain players (not too many as it is resource intensive) but tracking 1-2 relic carriers is fine. So if the players getting tracked use a teleport or speed hack they get auto-kicked or auto-banned. I am assuming they set it up so players carrying relics were getting tracked automatically and that's why I have never seen one get hacked. GW2 obviously didn't have such a system.

    And btw I know why you are mad at me. It is because you think I'm a GW2 hater, right?

    DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  • MaephistoMaephisto somewhere, DCPosts: 632Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by Maephisto
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by Maephisto
    Originally posted by boxsnd

    There are some good but also some really bad suggestions on this thread.

    I find this particular part of FO3 fiting.

    You speak very loudly on a couple of forums and (I have to admit) a good number of people agree with you. 

    I would like to know.....
    1. What games have you developed?
    2. What game development companies have you worked for in the past?
    3. What massive pvp systems have you developed that have been widely recieved as successful?
    4. What would you do with yourself if an "industry expert" told you your Ideas have no real basis in reality (.e. "have relics that are fought over that cannot be hacked.")
    5. On what basis do you form any of your "lists?"
    6. What would happen if  your "perfect ideas" were directly refuted by industry experts
    There is a reason "community managers" deal directly with us (including me), instead of the actual developers.  Because it is not a sound business practice to tell individuals they live in a fantasy world.

    You seem... upset. Why? 

     

    1. I never claimed my ideas were "perfect"

    2. I never claimed to be an expert.

    3. I have played a bit with DAoC private servers and can tell you that indeed it is pretty damn easy to make them  unhackable. Why do you think the DAoC relics were never hacked (at least on the servers I played) while the GW2 relics were getting hacked every day?

    4. Am I not allowed to have opinions and make lists?

    You forgot to say "U Mad Bro?"  (I am referring to your thread tiltes like "ESO devs. if you want to get PVP right......read this)

    I am simply saying, you are full of shit.  Those who beilieve thier views on how a MMO should be (wether it be PvE or PvP) are more than likely unfeasible or baseless in reality.

    The ideas we have for a "perfect MMO": are not always based on reality.  I would actually bet that what we think is intuitively a great idea for MMO's is actually detrimental.

     

    EDIT:  I forgot to answer #3.  I have no real answer to this......I dont know.    Are you claiming the old DAOC relics werent hackable?  Maybe there wasnt the type of crowd back then that felt the need to hack a MMO?  Werent MMO's in those days considered niche?

    There were always hackers in daoc but I have never seen a relic get hacked. There is an admin command to "track" certain players (not too many as it is resource intensive) but tracking 1-2 relic carriers is fine. So if the players getting tracked use a teleport or speed hack they get auto-kicked or auto-banned. I am assuming they set it up so players carrying relics were getting tracked automatically and that's why I have never seen one get hacked. GW2 obviously didn't have such a system.

    And btw I know why you are mad at me. It is because you think I'm a GW2 hater, right?

    I have openly agreed with you, in the past, on some of your suggestions for making WvW better. 

    Publicly labeling yourself as a hater, of any game, harms your own credibility.  

    Assuming......thats more like it.

    image

  • MightyPitMightyPit StuttgartPosts: 89Member
    Stop arguing here, you destroy the purpose of this thread. Thank you.

    MMO's played so far:
    UO,EQ,DAOC,EQ2,GW,ROM,WOW,WAR,AOC,LOTRO,RIFT,TSW,GW2,POE
    Looking forward to: Camelot Unchained, Star Citizen

  • mindw0rkmindw0rk St-petersburgPosts: 1,351Member

    1. Organizations that are ruled and controlled by players. And Im not speaking about guilds. Check MUDs like Achaea and Lusternia where player driven organization play huge role and bring much more interaction between players then graphical MMORPGs. 

    2. Hitboxes with different effects. You hit enemy in leg, his movement slows, you hit him in the arm, he can drop weapon to the ground, you hit in the head, you have a chance to behead him.

    3. Weather and daytime affecting combat effectiveness and some other things. It could be unique feature you could sell the game with.

    4. Diplomacy system from Vanguard: Saga of Heroes. Its incredible and very fun system, and it buggers me that no other developer made something like this. Interesting diplomacy quests, buffing cities with your deeds, solving conflicts peaceful way... But I want it to be not only a minigame against NPCs, but for interaction between players.

    5. One of kind artifacts that are gained for something really challenging. They shouldnt be OP, but cool enough to make owner proud.

    6. After logout character stays in the world and does what his master ordered him: earn money, grind reputation, develop skills and so on. Check Age of Wushu, it works very well there and I think this feature should be a part of all future MMORPGs

    7. UI that shows only things on screen that absolutely required at that exect time. The best example would be Skyrim with iHUD mod. It has nothing on screen while you adventuring, and when something hits you, health bat appears to show how much health you have. Why it is important? Soon alot of people will use Oculus Rift or its alternatives for gaming (it is really a future of gaming) and the more stuff there are on screen - the more it breaks immersion.

  • gregoryvggregoryvg Fredericksburg, VAPosts: 35Member
    Originally posted by Jostle

    3) Longer duration. CCs that come with a price. Easy solution? Make CC channeled. Could be single-target, AoE or PBAoE, but make it channeled. This way the inflicter is rendered impotent as well, and interrupting him or her can break CC in addition to using anti-CC abilities like purge. Or something along those lines.

    Very interesting idea.  That would add an intersting dynamic to the game as the channeller would need protection lest one of the mezzed uses purge and charges the caster.  I wonder if that would be balanced though with anti-cc abilities.  For instance, if one could just purge out and charge the caster would that make anti-cc too powerful?  Maybe the channel should be pulsing so every pules a certain percentage of the mezzed could/would be broken.

  • Telechubby4LifeTelechubby4Life Gainesville, FLPosts: 2Member

    Dear Mark J.

     

    If anything for your new game, you really should use the concept of the Text based mud/game from the Mythic-Realm days called "Darkness Falls: The Crusade." 3 Realms, a boat to evade other realms for gear etc. shards/orbs for realm bonuses. Steal these shards/orbs from other realms etc. You should know that game very well Mark.

    Or use Spellbinders concept. It was to good for its time.

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member

    I'm loving the passion, Mark.  And I agree that the MMO industry has lost its way, unfortunately.  I've beta tested WAR and my biggest idea expressed in the beta forums was to tackle the problem of managing a large group of players with a system that simplifies the process.  There's nothing that kills the fun mmore than spending all of your time (as group leader) herding cats. I think a structure that simplifies the whole process of managing a huge army of players would go a long ways in converting unfun random chaotic zerg fests into a more fun game of skill.  It would mean that a larger size force doesn't always automatically win.  Here are my ideas on that subject:

     

    Anybody who has led a sizeable raid in any of the other MMOs out there knows this first hand.  It becomes more about hard work and less about fun.  Who wants those aggrevations when you're playing the game to unwind and have fun?  My idea is a simple one:  Build in-game social tools to make managing an army of players a breeze and fun to do.  I can guarantee you that it would turn world pvp into a fun, strategic game rather than the current state of just a bunch of people aimlessly throwing themselves into the fight.  It would give players pride that they were able to outwit the other side in terms of strategy especially if the other side had greater numbers.  Also, the game would pull in the legions of folks out there (including myself) who have a passion for strategy type games on top of the usual rpg folks.

    Divide up responsibilities into roles of Lieutenant, Major, Colonel, General.  The Lieutenant would only have to control 5 other players, the Major would only see and organize the Lieutenants. the Colonel would only have to see and organize the Majors, and the General would control the entire army by simply directing the Colonels.  Each rank would have its own strategic map:  Lieutenant's map, Major's map, Colonel's map, General's map.  Each rank would also be able to DRAW on his own map and those of a rank below him will be able to see it.  So the General could conduct the entire war effort and know what's going on at a macro level.  Also, each player could have a "direction indicator" that indicates which way the player needs to head to get to a strategic point that a higher rank specifies.  I think this structure would greatly simplify controlling a large group of people and make world pvp much more strategic and fun.  If you build it, they will come.

    Edit:  The army structure would be DYNAMIC.  In other words, unlike a guild hierarchy, it wouldn't be set in stone.  Each and every player would have the ability to start an army.  He/she would have to recruit other players in real time.  So this avoids the problem of missing leaders when they happen to be offline... the army is built by active players that are online.  Over time, all those fragmented armies will merge into 1 or 2 great armies.  Think of it as something similar to how Spartacus's army of slaves grew from a ragtag, small group of gladiators into this huge force to be reckoned with over time. 

    An elegant solution to handling the "small-to-large" growth path of an army is as follows:

    The idea is that every rank level is just a recursive copy of a regular group of 5 players. So a general would have a group of 5 colonels, each of those 5 colonels would have a group of 5 majors, each major would have a group of 5 lieutenants. So essentially, the colonel, major, and lieutenants would be in two groups (the group above that they report to and the group that they control). When the general first starts the army, his title of "general" is essentially the same as "lieutenant" in a large army. His first group of 5 followers would be grunts. Gradually, as the army grows, he would move up to the equivalent of a "major" and then "colonel" after that. His followers would move up the ranks as well. So, essentially, the army would grow and build from the ground up. 

    When the army is at full capacity, the general's group would only contain colonels, the colonel's group would only contain majors, and so on down the chain of command. All the grunts will be under Lieutenants.

  • VoiidiinVoiidiin Barrow, AKPosts: 817Member

    More to the fire....

    11. No ultra skimpy armor. i want it to protect my wifes avatar, not showcase her breasticles.

    12. Encumberance over volume. Instead of having limited bag space i would rahter have an encumberance limiting what i can carry. This also leads into supply lines, pack mules, and other strategic advantages/disadvantages.

    13. Dyable armor and weapons. Tons of choices and make all dyes crafted by players.

    14. Particle effects for armor and weapons. Make them representative of a damage type on the weapon and maybe the damage resistance on armor/shields.

    15. Definable racial differences. Instead of human vs. human vs. human, please make stark differences in the factional races. Arthurian should be Human, Fae should be ... unmm Faelike, and the norse should be some sort of giant/dwarf. Or any other noticable racial differences. 

     

    On a side note, I noticed that Wildman (Gas Powered Games) is more than likely not going to get funded, i have played every game made by Chris Taylor, and i have the utmost respect for him, if Wildman does not get funded... Mark maybe look into some licensing about using the engine they are working on for it ?  Just an idea i had while reading an Interview on RPS with Chris Taylor. The engine looks amazing, but i have no idea how it would interpolate with an MMO setting.

    Lolipops !

  • skyexileskyexile MelbournePosts: 692Member

    Most of my things are more major backing core game design things, while they're not musts, but i think they enhance a games longevity greatly.

    1. Supply
    This is at the top of my list, because it simply adds a whole another layer to everything in the game and the points bellow have no context without supply. It became apparent that after playing warhammer, something missing from it that gave Planetside 1 just that little bit more depth was the supplying of bases with fuel, the became ever more apparent in GW2 with the supply in repairing bases and siege. This one simple mechanic adds so many more layers to the meta game by been able to cut off the enemys supply, be it through taking camps, killing people with supply or by stopping transports carrying supply you can effectively lay siege to a base all while giving those smaller groups like us a fun task to preform it just give you so many more combat options and enhances the meta strategy game so much.

    2. Mobile and mutiple spawn points.
    I find so many open PvP MMO's become the same old back and forth combat, we have seen it in the southern borderlands of GW2 and from warcamp to keep in WAR. just the same old fights again again again, having multiple spawn points(perhaps constructable, WITH SUPPLY!) greatly adds to the diversity of combat, instead of your enemy always respawning from their warcamp they could come from behind you or perhaps like in Aion setup a spawn point behind your lines or in your base.

    3. multiple goals for players and no one sole win condition, im probably going to sound like a carebear here, but its quite the opposite, i like people to fight, i dont want them to logout or stop PvPing, i want them to keep fighting me. Too many games these days dont have enough goals for players, in GW2 they made a win condition for players, in a matter of afew days or your realm could be so far behind that defeat was inevitable, our enemies would logout because they had no hope in winning, know what happens next? i logout because theres nobody to fight. There needs to be multiple goals for players, be it working for Gear, Renown ranks, crafting, a leaderboard or for the GLORY of your realm, players need to feel like they can still accomplish something even if their realm isnt "winning"

    4. This ties in with the above point, but make it so PvP is encouraged, it might sound like a dumb thing to say given its a PvP game, but I saw it time and time again in WAR, players would always take the path of least resistance to achieve whatever their goal is. In the case of war is was leveling renown rank. why kill a player thats worth 250/50, when we can get 500 points, EACH! i spent weeks chasing these people around, but again, its gets boring fighting an enemy that doesn't want to fight you and its absurd that people got more rewarded from PvE than PvP. players should be made to want to fight eachother, but do make it so they do still want to fight over land, if crafting is a big thing, put the best crafting tables in the keeps or something or the resources behind enemy lines...or in mines, inside keeps!...

    5. This is probably more a deal breaker for me, but for the love of god dont go down the whole "revolutionary combat experience" path GW2 combat is shit and clunky, Aions is so ping dependent, its a joke, Americans can get off 10 Aether flame's in a single aerial shackle to my 3, simply because of ping? what a joke, have a GCD keep the playing field level, its an MMO after all, players will be connecting from everywhere. For all WAR's flaw(sorry Mark) its still got the best combat out of many MMO's probably since WoW, and yes i rate WoW combat high because its smooth and that goes a long way. I'm not a particular fan of the holy trinity, it somewhat limits my abilty to take on multiple people solo and be a hero, but at least its proven and it works.


    SKYeXile
    TRF - GM - GW2, PS2, WAR, AION, Rift, WoW, WOT....etc...
    Future Crew - High Council. Planetside 1 & 2.

  • VoiidiinVoiidiin Barrow, AKPosts: 817Member
    Originally posted by MightyPit
    Stop arguing here, you destroy the purpose of this thread. Thank you.

    I agree 100% please leave the petty bickering out of this thread, take it to another or to private messages.

    Lolipops !

  • NibsNibs .Posts: 216Member Uncommon

    Make sure the servers can handle enough people in a very small area. I can't count the number of times Alb/Percival were accused of deliberatly crashing the zone/server just because when a Call to Arms was declared we could get 350+ people into Castle Excaliber within 12 minutes...

    I don't know what it was about DAoC that made this happen but I've not really seen it since: My guild would often take Old Frontiers Club Bled (Bledmeer Faste?) and hold it for 7+ hours of constant combat (chilling out in Miora's hot tub between attacks). As soon as the Sleeping Dragons or Companions of Steel guild banners went up the Mids knew they were in for a fight and turned up in ever increasing numbers. Each assault that was repelled would come back twice the size and try again. It was BRILLIANT! Still the most fun I have ever had in an MMO!

    Realm pride, guild pride and knowing your enemies certainly helped with this. I can't see this ever happening in GW2 as your enemies change every few weeks. You got to know who to worry about from the opposition. If the spice girls (Cinnamon and Sinnamon?) were out you knew to watch the tree lines. If Llestat kill spam started up you knew to hunt down the bastard as soon as possible. If the Bloodaxe Clan joined the field you knew to expect a tough fight that went right down to the line.

    I want that level of emotional investment in my MMO of choice again!

    Mark, bring it, man, bring it all on!

  • VoiidiinVoiidiin Barrow, AKPosts: 817Member
    Originally posted by Black_Asp
    Originally posted by Voiidiin

    So i was thinking we could come up with a list (5 ideas per post) that is a must have or must have not for CU.

    1. Movable and reusable siege.

    2. Faction based PvP not FFA. (failed on Andred and Mordred) Lot of other FFA MMOs avail, i think we need a fresh 3 faction representation.

    3. Collision detection, this might be a pipe dream but it would make all sieges more strategic, making a moving line to advance, blocking choke points.

    4. Mounted combat. One of the worst parts of GW2 is the lack of mounts.

    5. Scalable walls, one thing that was awesome about DAoC siege warfare was you had to watch the climb points, maybe this can be a skill that you train into, changing the speed you can scale a wall.

     

    I would ask those who have an axe to grind with Marc Jacobs, or hate the idea of Camelot Unchained to please just avoid posting in this thread, no i can't force you to not post, but it would be nice to just have a nice thread with suggestions, hopes, dreams.

     You realize these developers already have a vision for thier game right? Why do all you folks feel the need to be armchair developers?

    Kind of odd that you take a stance like this in a thread that the lead developer approves of and even asked for more of it. Just take a few minutes and read the posts and you will see what i am talking about. Offering suggestions for a game barely in development seems like a net positive not some negative hate stream we find in many other forums.

    Sorry if my excitement and others offends you. I plan to keep offering my ideas.

    Lolipops !

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by Black_Asp
    Originally posted by Voiidiin

    So i was thinking we could come up with a list (5 ideas per post) that is a must have or must have not for CU.

    1. Movable and reusable siege.

    2. Faction based PvP not FFA. (failed on Andred and Mordred) Lot of other FFA MMOs avail, i think we need a fresh 3 faction representation.

    3. Collision detection, this might be a pipe dream but it would make all sieges more strategic, making a moving line to advance, blocking choke points.

    4. Mounted combat. One of the worst parts of GW2 is the lack of mounts.

    5. Scalable walls, one thing that was awesome about DAoC siege warfare was you had to watch the climb points, maybe this can be a skill that you train into, changing the speed you can scale a wall.

     

    I would ask those who have an axe to grind with Marc Jacobs, or hate the idea of Camelot Unchained to please just avoid posting in this thread, no i can't force you to not post, but it would be nice to just have a nice thread with suggestions, hopes, dreams.

     You realize these developers already have a vision for thier game right? Why do all you folks feel the need to be armchair developers?

    Nothing wrong with throwing fresh new ideas out there for the developers to consider.  The problem with the MMO industry these days is that imagination has been extremely NARROW (the WoW model for the most part).  I hate the fact that every single MMO has devolved into an E-Sport rather than an engrossing fantasy.

  • shaodrinshaodrin sdf, AKPosts: 30Member

    some things i realy would like to see

    1. CC the daoc style -> means long lasting but reduced via dmg type resistance(makeing a templated armor a need) AND the possibilitys to avoid cc via realm abilitys, casted skills etc ->  in the early daoc stages cc realy was a problem but today this first mezz= win philosophy is gone there are even grps wich dont directly mezz on inc because a well placed cc in fight works better than giving the whole group cc immuntiy(also a point cc-ing someone should result into a immuntiy for a peroid of time against that cc type)

     

    2. hard rupts/no casting while moving except for instas -> this evolved in highly skilled fights, theory crafting and overall such a nice varity of gameplay styles it was just amazing ... having classes only in group to rupt the whole enemy support (theu anyone?) was realy fun

     

    3. high class synergy -> things like cast assist based on dmg typ debuffs and good spike coordination, deffensive tanks guarding and peeling enemy offenive tanks off of the own caster/supp + assisting with stuns and dmg for the cast assist and all the other group setup based coordination aspects were just amazing

    i know this will result into "lf healer 7/8" but w/e MJ said this game will be more hardcore and i like this since it means not everyone is able to do everything and you rely on your group mates

     

    4. speed -> giving different classes (but not all of em) different types of movement speed increases for the grp by this you give normal sized groups the chance to evade the zerg and pick the place+time you want to inc someone and maybe somekind of speedwarp wich deletes the speed effekt as long as you are in its range (hated the fact that sos speed broke within the sw -.-)

     

    5. ra system -> giving points for kills and kills only with increasing battle rank and access to new not to overpowered abilitys + the fact that you had some abilitys you needed for 8vs8 but most classes got everything they need with rr5+ (like 1 week of rvr) everything else you got  increased your power but not like these core abilitys

     

    sorry for my bad english ^^ i hope its at least understandable

  • Storm_FirebladeStorm_Fireblade FlensburgPosts: 156Member

    1) Open World Housing including Guildkeeps etc

    2) Viable Crafting, also regarding Housing and Sieges. Something like an architectskills, that allows to upgrade keepdoors and walls as well as siegeweapons etc. Items need to get repaired and eventually break so the market isn´t flooded at some point. And most of all: QUALITY when crafting. I want to work for a super item and be able to improve my chances for the super item by using better materials etc. I hate the "learn the reciepe, get those mats and boom same item again and again and again...". My name should be on that item for everyone to see and I should be able to optimize and customize my items when crafted.

    3) Asymetrical classes with skillbased characterbuildung. If I craft - craftings gets better. If I use my sword - swordskill gets

    4) Skills and mechanics to even the odds, when good players in small groups encounter a zerg. DAoC was on a good path from the beginning.

    5) A reason to participate in RvR. Longtime effects. Realmwide consequences.

    Camelot Unchained Fanpage
    https://simply-gaming.com/camelot/

  • Marcus-Marcus- Posts: 970Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Black_Asp
    Originally posted by Voiidiin

    So i was thinking we could come up with a list (5 ideas per post) that is a must have or must have not for CU.

    1. Movable and reusable siege.

    2. Faction based PvP not FFA. (failed on Andred and Mordred) Lot of other FFA MMOs avail, i think we need a fresh 3 faction representation.

    3. Collision detection, this might be a pipe dream but it would make all sieges more strategic, making a moving line to advance, blocking choke points.

    4. Mounted combat. One of the worst parts of GW2 is the lack of mounts.

    5. Scalable walls, one thing that was awesome about DAoC siege warfare was you had to watch the climb points, maybe this can be a skill that you train into, changing the speed you can scale a wall.

     

    I would ask those who have an axe to grind with Marc Jacobs, or hate the idea of Camelot Unchained to please just avoid posting in this thread, no i can't force you to not post, but it would be nice to just have a nice thread with suggestions, hopes, dreams.

     You realize these developers already have a vision for thier game right? Why do all you folks feel the need to be armchair developers?

     Curious why you decided to post this here, as opposed to just about any other thread on this site?

     

    I always though that this is what this place was for, a place to discuss what we like and dislike about MMOs (for the most part), or what we would like (or not like) to see in them. I mean why are we even here of not to be "armchair developers" , and/or offer our opinions?

  • VoiidiinVoiidiin Barrow, AKPosts: 817Member
    Originally posted by Marcus-
    Originally posted by Black_Asp
    Originally posted by Voiidiin

    So i was thinking we could come up with a list (5 ideas per post) that is a must have or must have not for CU.

    1. Movable and reusable siege.

    2. Faction based PvP not FFA. (failed on Andred and Mordred) Lot of other FFA MMOs avail, i think we need a fresh 3 faction representation.

    3. Collision detection, this might be a pipe dream but it would make all sieges more strategic, making a moving line to advance, blocking choke points.

    4. Mounted combat. One of the worst parts of GW2 is the lack of mounts.

    5. Scalable walls, one thing that was awesome about DAoC siege warfare was you had to watch the climb points, maybe this can be a skill that you train into, changing the speed you can scale a wall.

     

    I would ask those who have an axe to grind with Marc Jacobs, or hate the idea of Camelot Unchained to please just avoid posting in this thread, no i can't force you to not post, but it would be nice to just have a nice thread with suggestions, hopes, dreams.

     You realize these developers already have a vision for thier game right? Why do all you folks feel the need to be armchair developers?

     Curious why you decided to post this here, as opposed to just about any other thread on this site?

     

    I always though that this is what this place was for, a place to discuss what we like and dislike about MMOs (for the most part), or what we would like (or not like) to see in them. I mean why are we even here of not to be "armchair developers" , and/or offer our opinions?

    LOL from what i see Mr. Asp deleted his post.

    Just goes to show how reading the title only or even just the OP leads you down a bad path for replying.

    Lolipops !

Sign In or Register to comment.