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!

RvR Gameplay - Zerg, Full Group or Both?

13

Comments

  • MarkJacobsMarkJacobs CEO City State Entertainment Fairfax, VAPosts: 467Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Axxar
    Originally posted by MarkJacobs

    Originally posted by Axxar

    As far as keeps are concerned I think there should be very slight or no immediate benefits in capturing a keep. It should be actually HOLDING the keep that makes it worth having.

    I couldn't agree more. If we make it so that keep trading will reward players more than fighting, dying for and holding keeps then keep trading becomes a more viable way of earning renown/fame/rank/etc. We need to make the holding of key targets the way good things flow to the realm over time. The longer that the realm holds the objects of their desire, the better it is for the realm and we also have to make losing the objectives hurt too.

     

    Cool. Of course there also needs to be incentive to assault more keeps so each Realm doesn't just sit on the keeps they have in an eternal truce... I think? :)

    LOL, of course. Keep squatting, the next big revolution in RvR gameplay! :)

    Mark Jacobs
    CEO, City State Entertainment

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by MarkJacobs
    Originally posted by Axxar
    Originally posted by MarkJacobs

    Originally posted by Axxar

    As far as keeps are concerned I think there should be very slight or no immediate benefits in capturing a keep. It should be actually HOLDING the keep that makes it worth having.

    I couldn't agree more. If we make it so that keep trading will reward players more than fighting, dying for and holding keeps then keep trading becomes a more viable way of earning renown/fame/rank/etc. We need to make the holding of key targets the way good things flow to the realm over time. The longer that the realm holds the objects of their desire, the better it is for the realm and we also have to make losing the objectives hurt too.

     

    Cool. Of course there also needs to be incentive to assault more keeps so each Realm doesn't just sit on the keeps they have in an eternal truce... I think? :)

    LOL, of course. Keep squatting, the next big revolution in RvR gameplay! :)

    I think there should definitely be high incentive to take keeps, otherwise, people won't invest the time and pain to take them. The answer could be to make the incentive high and worth the effort, just make it harder to take.  

    Personally, I think the biggest problem to tackle is how to handle the "empty keep taking" problem that was prevalent in WAR.  There should be zero reward (in terms of experience... there should probably be some other incentive for owning a keep even though it's not being attacked) for  taking an empty, undefended keep.  It only encourages people to flow down the path of least resistance because it's so much harder to fight a defended keep.

  • I think it would be pretty weird if the best strategy to avoid losing a keep ended up being to leave it undefended.
  • VoiidiinVoiidiin Barrow, AKPosts: 817Member

    Ok so i am gonna post this in yet another thread asking for some consideration from Mark... collision detection. CD is integral to zerg reduction and control, but as i asked (no reply yet) is it viable in a game like CU, or any other MMO for that matter ?

    CD allows the use of fortifications, allows the use of foot soldiers holding choke points with ranged providing support. Instead of relying on CC abilities to try to counter a zerg why not implement CD and allow it to be the strategic change we need in RvR centric gameplay.

    Am i so far off base here ? 

    Lolipops !

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by Axxar
    I think it would be pretty weird if the best strategy to avoid losing a keep ended up being to leave it undefended.

    That's why there should be some sort of reward (monetary, perhaps?)  for owning a keep OUTSIDE of experience.  The key here is to prevent situations where people do nothing but take empty keeps to farm experience to avoid the pain of taking defended keeps.  I don't know if you've ever played WAR, but that was pretty common practice.

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member

    Actually, I just thought of another perk for owning a Keep:  CRAFTING.  This would fit right in with Mark's emphasis on Crafting in the game.  I think it would definitely put a prize value on taking a keep even though it's not defended and you get no experience from taking it.  This would be healthy for the game overall since people will have to fight each other (since that's the only way to gain experience outside of crafting.. not sure of what Mark has in mind) and the value of taking empty keeps will still be there if they want better equipment.  Win win.

    The idea is to remove the mentality that you can just farm empty Keeps for experience.  It fits RPG-wise since a person doesn't exactly improve him/herself in ability & experience by just taking empty keeps.

  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon

    The zerg is how untrained humans have fought for thousands of years. Extreme military organization is a relatively modern technique. As long as people play pvp, zergs will happen. I dont hate them, in truth nothing helps me imagine fighting on a dark age battlefield more than being in a giant zerg fight. With that said most of the time my small band of friends and I use a wolf pack technique to fight zergs. We move in and out, poke prod and harass and usually we get a few newblings to stray away from the herd and fall to our blades. Sometimes we get zerged, some times we just end up running away, but almost all of the time we have fun with them. Do I think we need systems to help us stay competitive in small vs large group fights? sure, but like in real life, 200 vs 10, it is and should be a mauling. 300 was the exception, not the norm, but like King Leo I always go down swinging.

  • shadeviceshadevice memphis, TNPosts: 68Member
    Originally posted by boxsnd
    Originally posted by Nibs

    It's up to players how they play, surely.

    The devs will provide us with an area to play in. They will put in trees and hills and keeps and other stuff.

    Whether you personally zerg it up or go the 8-man route, or both, is entirely up to you.

    It is not that simple for sure. Players will do whatever is more effective. 

     

    In daoc the veterans/high RR players preferred 8v8 because that is that gave them the most rps. The newbies/low RR players preferred zerging because they couldn't win many 8v8s and zerging was giving them more rps.

     

    In WAR at launch players didn't even RvR because scenarios gave them more renown points. A bit after launch they just traded keeps because that became more effective.

     

    In GW2 they zerg because only keep takes matter. Killing enemy players is almost worthless.

     

    If they want many different playstyles in CU they will need 1) to balance zerging rps with 8v8 rps, 2) aoe long duration CC so veteran 8mans can take on newbie zergs, 3) player kills being much more effective progression than keep takes/crafting etc, 4) perma-stealth stealthers that aren't wanted in group RvR and have to solo/stealthzerg to progress(this is important if they want soloing and small group rvr too).

    Well said. In summary most players will go the route of higher reward in a shorter time frame, human nature. Hopefully the game is balance in such ways that there are many options for equal reward while maintaining its original integrity. 

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

    The zerg is how untrained humans have fought for thousands of years. Extreme military organization is a relatively modern technique. 

    And don't you think it would be awesome if there were an in-game mechanic that made "extreme military organization" a breeze?  My dream is to play in an mmo in which being a  part of (or leading) a well organized army  against another well organized army (or 2) is the norm.  I think this is probably the most overlooked problem in mmos.  Well organized campaigns is so much more fun than roaming the countryside in an aimless zerg.

    I've talked about this idea before

    In a nutshell, I think it would be cool if there were an ingame, built-in tiered leadership structure for the Army.  Each tier would have his own map and those under his command would be able to see the drawings he makes on the map.  Such a mechanic could quickly convey the strategy without trying to bark orders in chat.  Also, it nicely segments the levels from each other to reduce noise & distraction.  Sure, you could probably do this with teamspeak or something, but this would be a really nice feature for those who don't wish to or can't jump onto teamspeak.  The idea is to make organized combat more commonplace.

     

  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon


    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by Xobdnas The zerg is how untrained humans have fought for thousands of years. Extreme military organization is a relatively modern technique. 
    And don't you think it would be awesome if there were an in-game mechanic that made "extreme military organization" a breeze?  My dream is to play in an mmo in which being a  part of (or leading) a well organized army  against another well organized army (or 2) is the norm.  I think this is probably the most overlooked problem in mmos.  Well organized campaigns is so much more fun than roaming the countryside in an aimless zerg.

    I've talked about this idea before

    In a nutshell, I think it would be cool if there were an ingame, built-in tiered leadership structure for the Army.  Each tier would have his own map and those under his command would be able to see the drawings he makes on the map.  Such a mechanic could quickly convey the strategy without trying to bark orders in chat.  Also, it nicely segments the levels from each other to reduce noise & distraction.  Sure, you could probably do this with teamspeak or something, but this would be a really nice feature for those who don't wish to or can't jump onto teamspeak.  The idea is to make organized combat more commonplace.

     


    I myself would love it. Whenever I lead a PVP raid I try to organize ranks, form lines, tier classes, etc. But that usually only works when my raid sees the zerg coming (and even than it usually breaks rank fast). When we are on the move and come upon some poor sob it's all out madness, no one can control a large group with unsuspecting newblings that meandered too far from the herd in their sights.

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

     


    Originally posted by Satarious

    Originally posted by Xobdnas The zerg is how untrained humans have fought for thousands of years. Extreme military organization is a relatively modern technique. 
    And don't you think it would be awesome if there were an in-game mechanic that made "extreme military organization" a breeze?  My dream is to play in an mmo in which being a  part of (or leading) a well organized army  against another well organized army (or 2) is the norm.  I think this is probably the most overlooked problem in mmos.  Well organized campaigns is so much more fun than roaming the countryside in an aimless zerg.

     

    I've talked about this idea before

    In a nutshell, I think it would be cool if there were an ingame, built-in tiered leadership structure for the Army.  Each tier would have his own map and those under his command would be able to see the drawings he makes on the map.  Such a mechanic could quickly convey the strategy without trying to bark orders in chat.  Also, it nicely segments the levels from each other to reduce noise & distraction.  Sure, you could probably do this with teamspeak or something, but this would be a really nice feature for those who don't wish to or can't jump onto teamspeak.  The idea is to make organized combat more commonplace.

     


     

    I myself would love it. Whenever I lead a PVP raid I try to organize ranks, form lines, tier classes, etc. But that usually only works when my raid sees the zerg coming (and even than it usually breaks rank fast). When we are on the move and come upon some poor sob it's all out madness, no one can control a large group with unsuspecting newblings that meandered too far from the herd in their sights.

    That's the beauty of having tiered leadership.  The newblings will most likely be the "grunts" (ie, the non-officers) spread out across the army in small, organized 6-man groups headed up by Lietenants.  The Lietenants will be able to control these meandering newblings far more efficiently than the man (or woman) on top.  If a newbling continually falls out of rank, just kick his ass out of the group.  Simple as that.  If the officers are all reliable, I could see this working.

  • alexisevicalexisevic Rochester, NYPosts: 41Member
    Originally posted by Satarious

     

     

    I'm well aware of purge, determination, group purge, etc. etc.  My point is that the REASON those systems were put into place in the first place was because of the huge outcry the players had over being mezzed and taken out of combat for long stretches of time.  Also, it literally turned pvp into a game of who fires off the first mezz shot.  All the other non-mezzing classes were just a bunch of assist monkies when the mezz was in place.  I don't know about you, but that kind of takes the fun out of true pvp when everybody is mixing it up.

    My whole point is why bother trying to implement a flawed system?  Det, purge, etc. is nothing but a bandaid on a sore.  I hope Mark Jacobs & company won't be afraid of a more innovative approach at handling the "extinction of small group" problem without the need for  long duration cc that will only open up a whole set of new problems.

     

    LOL, you are just betraying your ignorance about RVR with statements like  'every other class was a assist monky when the mezz was in place'.  If the outcome determined by who got the first mez, Albs with their bolt range aoe mez would have won every engagement and owned every server.  Clearly that didn't happen.  Go watch 8v8 vids on youtube.  Tell me how many people you see standing around and dieing due to being mezzed.

    As a warrior I was mezzed for 10 seconds tops, and thats with single target red mez.    As a caster I was mezzed if I screwed up and thus I deserved it.  Its called positioning, interupts, and nearsite. 

  • JetrpgJetrpg Whitehouse, OHPosts: 2,376Member
    Originally posted by alexisevic
    Originally posted by Satarious
     

    I'm well aware of purge, determination, group purge, etc. etc.  My point is that the REASON those systems were put into place in the first place was because of the huge outcry the players had over being mezzed and taken out of combat for long stretches of time.  Also, it literally turned pvp into a game of who fires off the first mezz shot.  All the other non-mezzing classes were just a bunch of assist monkies when the mezz was in place.  I don't know about you, but that kind of takes the fun out of true pvp when everybody is mixing it up.

    My whole point is why bother trying to implement a flawed system?  Det, purge, etc. is nothing but a bandaid on a sore.  I hope Mark Jacobs & company won't be afraid of a more innovative approach at handling the "extinction of small group" problem without the need for  long duration cc that will only open up a whole set of new problems.

    LOL, you are just betraying your ignorance about RVR with statements like  'every other class was a assist monky when the mezz was in place'.  If the outcome determined by who got the first mez, Albs with their bolt range aoe mez would have won every engagement and owned every server.  Clearly that didn't happen.  Go watch 8v8 vids on youtube.  Tell me how many people you see standing around and dieing due to being mezzed.

    As a warrior I was mezzed for 10 seconds tops, and thats with single target red mez.    As a caster I was mezzed if I screwed up and thus I deserved it.  Its called positioning, interupts, and nearsite. 

    "And don't you think it would be awesome if there were an in-game mechanic that made "extreme military organization" a breeze?  My dream is to play in an mmo in which being a  part of (or leading) a well organized army  against another well organized army (or 2) is the norm.  I think this is probably the most overlooked problem in mmos.  Well organized campaigns is so much more fun than roaming the countryside in an aimless zerg." - Satarious

    So you'll lead a giant army, but cannot handle the mechanics of cc and cleansing. The thing that no one is mentioning is your not cc'ed after you get hit (which in zergs keeps etc, basiclly ment you were not long cc'ed) ... cc, even when it was difficult to remove, was not that big of an issue becuase typically both groups got cc'ed (the first group to land hit more tho that is typically true). Some times a group with get your entire group not break or pbaoe up etc... good you played poorly. 

    The real issue was with people who just played the game never thought of its mechanics or tactics to deal with cc (IE mindless zombies of the zerg {note many people in zergs wre very good players, zergs took keeps}) Then sure i bet CC seemed awful. Everyone knew how powerful it was, but they had it too and you could counter it so it wasn't a big deal (no more than healing, or dps, or anything).

    Maybe you didn't want to deal with that aspect of daocs pvp, but it made it far more tactical. And its ok to want a less tactical game or to disfavor that type of tactics. And i will state i normally find most people who state what i am about to do so out of a lack of immagination. I do not see a system as effective and easy to implament as long dur , easy break cc for dealing with open world (random player numbers) pvp.  I can think of maybe a more realistic systme where tank have large sheilds and (invisiable bubbles) and they line up to literally block incoming attackers healers/dps behind them. With this its possible to have a smaller group take on a larger group (but if the smaller is say in a chokepoint the big group can just walk on by). Furthermore, what do tanks do now they are moblie shields they don't fight they cannot break formation, and a group double your size will win eay becuase they can easily flank you. Though it does provide the concept that sleathers / light melee type classes might be able to walk past tanks cd to get to the soft targets... with some balancing application.. 30% movement debuff w/e.  This is the best i could think of and as you can see im not bad at generating system that could work. Finding solutions for system issues is what i do. DAoc (2004 2003 somewhere in there) CC was a effective and good system, beyond it adding another dimension to the game, it added another role to people playing it making healers more than just healers, buffers more than just bufffers, and casters more than just casters.

    This is where i am coming from on entire issue ofcalling cleanse /purge /etc it a banaid / quick fix (Fixes were needed, DR. etc. i feel that the double immunity timer might be overkill for the long ccs tho.. but w/e). So lets just apply this possition to other things... Players do too much damage they can kill me, that is what healing is for (but its a bandaid, not a viable feature), These bosses hit to hard i almost get one shot, thats what tanks are for (but its a bandaid, not a viable feature). See where i am going with this was there balancing issues with a game made in under two years with a small number of people .. sure. But these counter tools did exist maybe just not enough of them for cc day 1.  However, the current state of daoc is from the mentality of these i don't want to think or play tactically, seen with further cc changes, and the loss of ladders, and etc. Challenges are good it why people play games for more than a moment, and daocs CC was fully viable.

     

    "Society in every state is a blessing, but government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one ..." - Thomas Paine

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

    So you'll lead a giant army, but cannot handle the mechanics of cc and cleansing. The thing that no one is mentioning is your not cc'ed after you get hit (which in zergs keeps etc, basiclly ment you were not long cc'ed) ... cc, even when it was difficult to remove, was not that big of an issue becuase typically both groups got cc'ed (the 

     

    I never said or implied that I "couldn't handle it".  Aside from the fact that it's no fun being taken out of action for too long, the gameplay that it results in gets boring after awhile.  It really limits the scope &  variety in PvP, imho:

    scenario #1:  Win

    1) Spot the group 2-3 times your size first

    2) Bomb them with mezz

    3) Assist kill the 1-2 Healers in a split second to soften the Tanks

    4) Assist kill the casters

    5) Assist kill the now gimp Tanks who have no heal

    6) Rinse/Repeat

    scenario #2: Lose

    1) Get spotted first

    2) Same as scenario #1 only in reverse.

    This really does limit the variety & scope in PvP since the only "skill" really comes down to the "driver" & mezzer in the group paying attention. Mixing it up without mezz, on the other hand,  is much more fluid and varied combat.

  • Lore84Lore84 NorthamptonPosts: 69Member
    Its not just down to mez, yes its a big deal but with counters in place it isnt always the be all end all. It seems that most people want each different playstyle to be viable and so does Mark. It will be intetesting to see what he comes up with.

    Ex-DAOC, Excalibur

  • ZinzanZinzan NorthPosts: 1,351Member
    Originally posted by alexisevic
    Originally posted by Satarious

     

     

    I'm well aware of purge, determination, group purge, etc. etc.  My point is that the REASON those systems were put into place in the first place was because of the huge outcry the players had over being mezzed and taken out of combat for long stretches of time.  Also, it literally turned pvp into a game of who fires off the first mezz shot.  All the other non-mezzing classes were just a bunch of assist monkies when the mezz was in place.  I don't know about you, but that kind of takes the fun out of true pvp when everybody is mixing it up.

    My whole point is why bother trying to implement a flawed system?  Det, purge, etc. is nothing but a bandaid on a sore.  I hope Mark Jacobs & company won't be afraid of a more innovative approach at handling the "extinction of small group" problem without the need for  long duration cc that will only open up a whole set of new problems.

     

    LOL, you are just betraying your ignorance about RVR with statements like  'every other class was a assist monky when the mezz was in place'.  If the outcome determined by who got the first mez, Albs with their bolt range aoe mez would have won every engagement and owned every server.  Clearly that didn't happen.  Go watch 8v8 vids on youtube.  Tell me how many people you see standing around and dieing due to being mezzed.

    As a warrior I was mezzed for 10 seconds tops, and thats with single target red mez.    As a caster I was mezzed if I screwed up and thus I deserved it.  Its called positioning, interupts, and nearsite. 

    Your talking about determination, my memory might be a bit fuzzy, but im pretty sure this was not around in the early days of long duration CC.

    Also, there were counters to stop sorcs landing the first AoE mezz, Bards for example owned many sorcs because of this thanks to their insta lullabye. Most sorcs would be so intent on spamming AoE mezz they didn't realise till too late they had no target or the wrong target. Top groups would not run on stick either, they would spread out to stop being pwned by the AoE mezz....but most groups were not top groups, they would run on stick and get obliterated.

    The first AoE mezz usually won the encounter, you could either hope some moron hit you with an AoE or targetted you by mistake while the assist train rampaged through your group or you had to wait for your group mate to fire their purge and de-mezz you. Otherwise you had to burn your purge (assuming you even had purge). Smart groups took out the de-mezzers first and would wait for players to burn purge on mezz then stun lock them or chain-root interrupt.

    During the days of long duration CC a good group who got in the first AoE mezz almost always won, if they lost, it was down more to them screwing it up than the enemy's actions. MA = win back in those days assuming you had a good MA who was watching the whole fight.

    Expresso gave me a Hearthstone beta key.....I'm so happy :)

  • CananCanan Wedowee, ALPosts: 94Member
    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by Jetrpg
     

    So you'll lead a giant army, but cannot handle the mechanics of cc and cleansing. The thing that no one is mentioning is your not cc'ed after you get hit (which in zergs keeps etc, basiclly ment you were not long cc'ed) ... cc, even when it was difficult to remove, was not that big of an issue becuase typically both groups got cc'ed (the 

     

    I never said or implied that I "couldn't handle it".  Aside from the fact that it's no fun being taken out of action for too long, the gameplay that it results in gets boring after awhile.  It really limits the scope &  variety in PvP, imho:

    scenario #1:  Win

    1) Spot the group 2-3 times your size first

    2) Bomb them with mezz

    3) Assist kill the 1-2 Healers in a split second to soften the Tanks

    4) Assist kill the casters

    5) Assist kill the now gimp Tanks who have no heal

    6) Rinse/Repeat

    scenario #2: Lose

    1) Get spotted first

    2) Same as scenario #1 only in reverse.

    This really does limit the variety & scope in PvP since the only "skill" really comes down to the "driver" & mezzer in the group paying attention. Mixing it up without mezz, on the other hand,  is much more fluid and

    Again, you are using your opinion as canon. What you are saying is not true and is spreading false knowledge to people who have not yet played Dark Age of Camelot. Your negative experience might stem from the fact that you or the people you played with didn't know how to handle certain situations (for example, being hit with a mezz first) but that is not the game's fault. DAoC granted you and your allies with numerous tools to prevent what you listed from happening - the fault lies with you and/or your teammates if you didn't use those tools to your advantage and had a negative experience.

    However, for players that worked together and used their given abilities and tools to assist themselves as well as their teammates the game was a COMPLETELY different story. I would greatly appreciate if you'd stop belittling one of the best PvP games of the last decade (that is not my opinion, but a well shared sentiment) with your opinionated comments and bad experence. It honestly comes off as bitter and I'm sorry your experience of an exceptional PvP game can be explained in two sentences.

    I have said this before and I will say it again - people with your particular opinion and mentality are one of the reasons why most of the recently released PvP games are dumbed down and have no adverse effects for players who make mistakes. If you make a mistake it is OKAY for the game to punish you...you learn to be a better player this way. If there is no negative effects for being a poor player everyone is a unique starfish and nobody really has a rewarding experience.

     

     

     

  • CananCanan Wedowee, ALPosts: 94Member
    Originally posted by Zinzan
    Originally posted by alexisevic
    Originally posted by Satarious

     

     

    I'm well aware of purge, determination, group purge, etc. etc.  My point is that the REASON those systems were put into place in the first place was because of the huge outcry the players had over being mezzed and taken out of combat for long stretches of time.  Also, it literally turned pvp into a game of who fires off the first mezz shot.  All the other non-mezzing classes were just a bunch of assist monkies when the mezz was in place.  I don't know about you, but that kind of takes the fun out of true pvp when everybody is mixing it up.

    My whole point is why bother trying to implement a flawed system?  Det, purge, etc. is nothing but a bandaid on a sore.  I hope Mark Jacobs & company won't be afraid of a more innovative approach at handling the "extinction of small group" problem without the need for  long duration cc that will only open up a whole set of new problems.

     

    LOL, you are just betraying your ignorance about RVR with statements like  'every other class was a assist monky when the mezz was in place'.  If the outcome determined by who got the first mez, Albs with their bolt range aoe mez would have won every engagement and owned every server.  Clearly that didn't happen.  Go watch 8v8 vids on youtube.  Tell me how many people you see standing around and dieing due to being mezzed.

    As a warrior I was mezzed for 10 seconds tops, and thats with single target red mez.    As a caster I was mezzed if I screwed up and thus I deserved it.  Its called positioning, interupts, and nearsite. 

    Your talking about determination, my memory might be a bit fuzzy, but im pretty sure this was not around in the early days of long duration CC.

    Also, there were counters to stop sorcs landing the first AoE mezz, Bards for example owned many sorcs because of this thanks to their insta lullabye. Most sorcs would be so intent on spamming AoE mezz they didn't realise till too late they had no target or the wrong target. Top groups would not run on stick either, they would spread out to stop being pwned by the AoE mezz....but most groups were not top groups, they would run on stick and get obliterated.

    The first AoE mezz usually won the encounter, you could either hope some moron hit you with an AoE or targetted you by mistake while the assist train rampaged through your group or you had to wait for your group mate to fire their purge and de-mezz you. Otherwise you had to burn your purge (assuming you even had purge). Smart groups took out the de-mezzers first and would wait for players to burn purge on mezz then stun lock them or chain-root interrupt.

    During the days of long duration CC a good group who got in the first AoE mezz almost always won, if they lost, it was down more to them screwing it up than the enemy's actions. MA = win back in those days assuming you had a good MA who was watching the whole fight.

    Why are we talking about DAoC in its first era of creation? The game has been around for more than a decade and evolved rapidly over time. Yes, in the beginning there were abilities that were overpowered and had little to no counter. As the game evolved that all changed and the "whoever won the first CC" was a thing of the past. Why are we hanging on an issue that happened in the first year of a game that was around for 10? Look to what happens in modern day DAoC or at the very most go back five years (which again, the "first CC wins" was not around anymore). Let's not go back to beginning of the game where it had not yet evolved into a great strategic and tactical PvP game.

  • AeonbladesAeonblades Home, GAPosts: 2,083Member
    Both. It will be just DAoC I hope where the pro RvR people are constantly looking for that good 8v8 fight while the zergers can take keeps and fight off other zergs. Plus zergs give the 8 men guys a good reality check every once in a while, unless the zerg is just awful :)

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

  • General_Dru-ZodGeneral_Dru-Zod Unknown, CAPosts: 136Member
    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by Jetrpg
     

    So you'll lead a giant army, but cannot handle the mechanics of cc and cleansing. The thing that no one is mentioning is your not cc'ed after you get hit (which in zergs keeps etc, basiclly ment you were not long cc'ed) ... cc, even when it was difficult to remove, was not that big of an issue becuase typically both groups got cc'ed (the 

     

    I never said or implied that I "couldn't handle it".  Aside from the fact that it's no fun being taken out of action for too long, the gameplay that it results in gets boring after awhile.  It really limits the scope &  variety in PvP, imho:

    scenario #1:  Win

    1) Spot the group 2-3 times your size first

    2) Bomb them with mezz

    3) Assist kill the 1-2 Healers in a split second to soften the Tanks

    4) Assist kill the casters

    5) Assist kill the now gimp Tanks who have no heal

    6) Rinse/Repeat

    scenario #2: Lose

    1) Get spotted first

    2) Same as scenario #1 only in reverse.

    This really does limit the variety & scope in PvP since the only "skill" really comes down to the "driver" & mezzer in the group paying attention. Mixing it up without mezz, on the other hand,  is much more fluid and varied combat.

    1. If your in the frontiers without Purge I,II,III

    2. If your in the frontiers without determination 1-5

    3.If your int he frontiers without a anti-mezz caster or if your caster doesnt have 1 & 2

    You and your group of neophytes will be at the mercy of mezz and stun spells.

    image

  • tleartlear Toronto, ONPosts: 142Member
    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by Jetrpg
     

    So you'll lead a giant army, but cannot handle the mechanics of cc and cleansing. The thing that no one is mentioning is your not cc'ed after you get hit (which in zergs keeps etc, basiclly ment you were not long cc'ed) ... cc, even when it was difficult to remove, was not that big of an issue becuase typically both groups got cc'ed (the 

     

    I never said or implied that I "couldn't handle it".  Aside from the fact that it's no fun being taken out of action for too long, the gameplay that it results in gets boring after awhile.  It really limits the scope &  variety in PvP, imho:

    scenario #1:  Win

    1) Spot the group 2-3 times your size first

    2) Bomb them with mezz

    3) Assist kill the 1-2 Healers in a split second to soften the Tanks

    4) Assist kill the casters

    5) Assist kill the now gimp Tanks who have no heal

    6) Rinse/Repeat

    scenario #2: Lose

    1) Get spotted first

    2) Same as scenario #1 only in reverse.

    This really does limit the variety & scope in PvP since the only "skill" really comes down to the "driver" & mezzer in the group paying attention. Mixing it up without mezz, on the other hand,  is much more fluid and varied combat.

    This is just laughable, after RAs were added this basically never happened before that nobody ran 8mans to begin with

  • CananCanan Wedowee, ALPosts: 94Member
    Originally posted by tlear
    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by Jetrpg
     

    So you'll lead a giant army, but cannot handle the mechanics of cc and cleansing. The thing that no one is mentioning is your not cc'ed after you get hit (which in zergs keeps etc, basiclly ment you were not long cc'ed) ... cc, even when it was difficult to remove, was not that big of an issue becuase typically both groups got cc'ed (the 

     

    I never said or implied that I "couldn't handle it".  Aside from the fact that it's no fun being taken out of action for too long, the gameplay that it results in gets boring after awhile.  It really limits the scope &  variety in PvP, imho:

    scenario #1:  Win

    1) Spot the group 2-3 times your size first

    2) Bomb them with mezz

    3) Assist kill the 1-2 Healers in a split second to soften the Tanks

    4) Assist kill the casters

    5) Assist kill the now gimp Tanks who have no heal

    6) Rinse/Repeat

    scenario #2: Lose

    1) Get spotted first

    2) Same as scenario #1 only in reverse.

    This really does limit the variety & scope in PvP since the only "skill" really comes down to the "driver" & mezzer in the group paying attention. Mixing it up without mezz, on the other hand,  is much more fluid and varied combat.

    This is just laughable, after RAs were added this basically never happened before that nobody ran 8mans to begin with

    I agree - and if he did indeed think Dark Age of Camelot's PvP was this simplistic and silly why in the world would he even want to play CU? I don't understand. If I had that kind of experience I don't think I'd be on a forum that has to do with the developement of a similar game by the same creator. <baffled>

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

    @zinzan

     

    2) give me an example of a better CC system that led to more fun open world PvP in another game. The vast majority of ex-DAoCers  consider it the best PvP they have played. I don't know of any other MMO like that. Also this most certainly didn't kill daoc. We all know what killed daoc.

     

    3) It sounds like you want keep trading. There should be other motivations to own a keep, like DF, relics, farming rps by defending the keep, or just making your guild famous and displaying your huge banner to whoever comes close etc. But making the keeps part of the progression is a classic mistake that I doubt they will make again after the WAR disaster.

     

    4) DAoC RvR was like a perfectly working food chain. The zergs ate the groups who ate the small groups who ate the soloers. If you make every class a group char you break the chain. Why would someone solo? So the soloers will go extinct. If there are no soloers, why would the small groups go out since they won't have soloers as easy rps. In the end only the zergs will remain.

    I think GW2's system is the best because short term CC effects lead to situation awareness and using it at the most opportune times.  The long duration CC effects of DAoC were idiotic by comparison.  I played DAoC from release till 1 month after ToA.  Everyone I speek to about DAoC consider it the best PvP because it had 3 factions, split PvE/PvP leveling areas, meaningful PvP with an alternate advancement system and a glorious PvP/PvE dungeons called Darkness Falls.  The keep taking and relic holding were just ancillary window dressings.

     

    Relic and DF are the best way to limit keep trading.

    Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

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

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

    image

  • MMOExposedMMOExposed lalal land, DCPosts: 6,255Member Uncommon

    H

     

     

    S

     

     

    I would suggest that the factions with the smaller numbers get access to the more powerful AoE sieges to plow down zergss.

    that could balance things out.

    image

  • SatariousSatarious Kansas City, MOPosts: 1,075Member
    Originally posted by Canan
    Originally posted by Satarious
    Originally posted by Jetrpg
     

     

    I never said or implied that I "couldn't handle it".  Aside from the fact that it's no fun being taken out of action for too long, the gameplay that it results in gets boring after awhile.  It really limits the scope &  variety in PvP, imho:

    scenario #1:  Win

    1) Spot the group 2-3 times your size first

    2) Bomb them with mezz

    3) Assist kill the 1-2 Healers in a split second to soften the Tanks

    4) Assist kill the casters

    5) Assist kill the now gimp Tanks who have no heal

    6) Rinse/Repeat

    scenario #2: Lose

    1) Get spotted first

    2) Same as scenario #1 only in reverse.

    This really does limit the variety & scope in PvP since the only "skill" really comes down to the "driver" & mezzer in the group paying attention. Mixing it up without mezz, on the other hand,  is much more fluid and

    Again, you are using your opinion as canon. What you are saying is not true and is spreading false knowledge to people who have not yet played Dark Age of Camelot. Your negative experience might stem from the fact that you or the people you played with didn't know how to handle certain situations (for example, being hit with a mezz first) but that is not the game's fault. DAoC granted you and your allies with numerous tools to prevent what you listed from happening - the fault lies with you and/or your teammates if you didn't use those tools to your advantage and had a negative experience.

    However, for players that worked together and used their given abilities and tools to assist themselves as well as their teammates the game was a COMPLETELY different story. I would greatly appreciate if you'd stop belittling one of the best PvP games of the last decade (that is not my opinion, but a well shared sentiment) with your opinionated comments and bad experence. It honestly comes off as bitter and I'm sorry your experience of an exceptional PvP game can be explained in two sentences.

    I have said this before and I will say it again - people with your particular opinion and mentality are one of the reasons why most of the recently released PvP games are dumbed down and have no adverse effects for players who make mistakes. If you make a mistake it is OKAY for the game to punish you...you learn to be a better player this way. If there is no negative effects for being a poor player everyone is a unique starfish and nobody really has a rewarding experience.

    It's not just MY opinion, pal.  It was a whole lot of people's opinion which is why the Mythic developers eventually buckled and decided to water down long duration cc quite a bit with things such as purge, det, etc.  You're missing my point entirely.  I am very much aware that there are ways to break out of it NOW.  My point is that the long duration cc system has been flawed from the beginning.  I don't know if you played from release (I did), but you seem to be kind of a late comer to the game when those bandaid fixes were already in.  I stress again:  I'm aware that there are currently counters to long duration cc NOW.  Can you at least acknowledge that fact so that I don't have to keep rehashing that point?  Thanks.

    Now, the only reason I'm against copying and pasting Daoc's mezz/counter-mezz system to this new game is because it's a little like one of those Used Cars that  the dealership patches up JUST ENOUGH to fool you into believing that there's nothing wrong with it.  Then a week later, the engine breaks and it's beyond repair.  My point is that it's time to get a new car.  There needs to be a different UNDERLYING system.  None of this "long duration, but you can break out of SOMETIMES" crap.  That's just a bandaid that has always been, is, and will always be a flawed system.  I just think it's a sad testimate that you 8-rollers are so afraid to give up your dirty woobie blanket because you have no faith that something better can be done.  It's time to let go of that flawed system and move on.

    And btw, long duration cc is just a tiny ass fraction of the totality of Daoc.  I just think it's hilarious how you 8-rollers think that long duration cc is the be all, end all of Daoc.  There was SO MUCH that I loved about daoc.  The long duration bit was just a small dink in the armor, as far as I'm concerned.

Sign In or Register to comment.