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!

Are you in favor of Battlegrounds?

24567

Comments

  • SpeelySpeely Seattle, WAPosts: 861Member
    This isn't related to CU specifically because the design of CU has no need of BGs... But holy hell if Thidranki was not more fun than anyone should be allowed to have.

    Say what you will about it's effects on big boy RvR. You will have some valid points. Say what you will about the direction that the BGs took the game in. Again, valid points will be made.

    But holy SHIT was Thidranki FUN. Hell, if Thid was the endgame, I would have been happy. I liked the BGs that much. Even Caledonia was fun. Thid just appealed to me because that's when classes started being what they were supposed to be, but didn't yet have any "i win" buttons.

    Thidranki is my single fondest memory of an mmo. Example:

    I used to run around with a bow in my hand in Thid as an elven piercemaster. I was a SB/Infil/Scout/Hunter target for days. I served a purpose: I rooted out stealthers. Even if I got PAed, I would NOT lose the fight unless stealth-zerged, and even then I could at least report (because cmon... Stealth zergs are both unimaginative and easy mode).

    This kind of gameplay was facilitated by a smaller map. I truly look forward to a more expansive and all-encompassing RvR system, but I would be lying if I said that there was ANY part of DAoC that I enjoyed more than the BGs.

    I am not sure what dark gods Mythic sacrificed children to in order to acheive this, but "THANK YOU DARK GODS!"

    Best of times.

  • meddyckmeddyck Athens, GAPosts: 1,140Member Uncommon

    Again yes I would like there to be a DAOC style battleground. Basically clone Thidranki or Molvik and drop it into CU.

    There is going to be a form of RvR progression in this game. That means brand new toons will be at a considerable disadvantage for the first week or two.

    Not to mention you simply won't know how to play a new toon effectively since you won't have spent time leveling it first. A BG then takes the place of a tutorial zone.

    Put a cap of realm rank 3 or the equivalent so players can't stay there forever and reach higher ranks. I don't mind if there is a /rpoff function to prevent a character from progressing so it can stay in the BG forever.

    On a more basic level, many players find BGs to be fun. Why not give those players a place in CU they'll find fun? That will keep them playing and subscribing.

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • ZiftylrhavicZiftylrhavic GrenoblePosts: 222Member
     CU has no PvE at all

    This part is easily misunderstood.

     

    There will be PvE, but it won't get you any exp, gold nor items. I don't know what role it'll play in the game, maybe some will be needed for crafting material, some will just be easy to kill things to relax and some will be powerful and get involved in the battles if you're not careful, but MJ love dragons and there will probably be at least 3 of them.

     

    As for the training, we already know there will be a safe area, there will be a tutorial there and plenty of time to learn how to use your character by fighting straw mannequin or low level monster.

     

    Of course you won't be able to win a 1 vs 1 fight, but don't forget than the game design wants people to socialize :

    "These examples are literally the tip of the iceberg (hmm, iceberg, titanic, MMORPG, bad word association) when it comes to how we are going to encourage players within a realm to work together to accomplish their goals."

    (http://citystateentertainment.com/camelotunchained/, Foundational principle 9 section)

     

    So being a noob won't be as much a problem as in other games.

  • TuktzTuktz Atlanta, GAPosts: 299Member

    I liked non instances bgs in daoc, but I don't see the point in cu.

    in daoc, it was to split up people,by level, and give people,a rvr playground while leveling in a pve world.

    in cu the whole world is rvr, and there's no pve leveling, so,I don't think bgs are needed.

    the point of cu is a static world.

    nowmimwouldnt mind underground non instances rvr dungeons :-)

    image
    MMO history - EVE GW2 SWTOR RIFT WAR COH/V EQ2 WOW DAOC
    Tuktz - http://www.heretic.shivtr.com/

  • akleyakley plymouth, MAPosts: 17Member

    Battlegrounds, of any kind, SUCK. It is not real pvp. I hate them.

     

    Plenty of games with BGs, if you like them go play one of those.

  • ScambugScambug TortugaPosts: 389Member

    RvR alone gets boring after a while to me. BGs are a good way to mix it up a little while still doing PvP.

    Either way I don't really care. The presence or not of BGs isn't what makes a good or bad game.

  • drakon3drakon3 Liberty Lake, WAPosts: 114Member
    Originally posted by akley

    Battlegrounds, of any kind, SUCK. It is not real pvp. I hate them.

    This sounds like the response of some 8man's that didn't like having their casual RP fodder going and having fun elsewhere.  How is it any less PvP than 50 RvR was?  Your argument holds true for BG's like WoW or Scenarios from WAR etc., but DAoC BG's are very different from those.  It was a scaled down, near identical copy of 50 RvR. 

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by drakon3
    Originally posted by akley

    Battlegrounds, of any kind, SUCK. It is not real pvp. I hate them.

    This sounds like the response of some 8man's that didn't like having their casual RP fodder going and having fun elsewhere.  How is it any less PvP than 50 RvR was?  Your argument holds true for BG's like WoW or Scenarios from WAR etc., but DAoC BG's are very different from those.  It was a scaled down, near identical copy of 50 RvR. 

    BG's are NOT instances

  • DMKanoDMKano Gamercentral, AKPosts: 8,506Member Uncommon
    Yes to DAoC style bgs
  • BrohimeBrohime Raytown, MOPosts: 34Member

    DAoC Battlegrounds were the best, I actually prefered their battlegrounds to 50 RvR. It was just soo hard to get templated and masterlevels to compete in level 50 rvr.

     

  • BeansnBreadBeansnBread PshPosts: 5,498Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Brohime

    DAoC Battlegrounds were the best, I actually prefered their battlegrounds to 50 RvR. It was just soo hard to get templated and masterlevels to compete in level 50 rvr.

     

    So is that what unchained is going to be like in RvR? Are people going to have to get stomped for a month or two to compete?

  • audizmannaudizmann AalborgPosts: 24Member

    I don't think there should be battlegrounds in CU and I highly doubt there will be. The lack of actual levels, and the "consequence of dying" are two strong indications against the use of BGs.

  • grogstormgrogstorm Peyton, COPosts: 304Member Uncommon

    I like battlegrounds they offered me a change of pace within many games.  I also see them as a good game extender.  After you have played to max level and have a lot of in game money, you need something to spend it on.

    Enter the twinks :)  And they need battlegrounds to fight in.

    This also helps the crafters and the overall player economy.  When my main toon was leveling I would never waste my money on exotic gear.  The money was too precious.  But later in the game when money was not that much of a factor, gear upgrades become a focus.

    Grog

  • IcewhiteIcewhite Elmhurst, ILPosts: 6,403Member
    Originally posted by akley

    Battlegrounds, of any kind, SUCK. It is not real pvp. I hate them.

    Plenty of games with BGs, if you like them go play one of those.

    Objective-less PvP tends to suck. Dueling in the road...yawn.

    This is very much a "your mileage will vary" experience, obviously.

    A) Territory control, by definition, includes some strategic objectives, not purely tactical.

    B) Open world, usually, just a simplistic "rawr get em guys" zerg v zerg.

    C)  "Battlergrounds", as typically instanced in modern games, opposite end of the spectrum, strategic goals and games that end.

     

    Pick your poison and go nuts. :shrug:

    Self-pity imprisons us in the walls of our own self-absorption. The whole world shrinks down to the size of our problem, and the more we dwell on it, the smaller we are and the larger the problem seems to grow.

  • TelondarielTelondariel Ottawa, ONPosts: 1,001Member
    Originally posted by colddog04
    Originally posted by Brohime

    DAoC Battlegrounds were the best, I actually prefered their battlegrounds to 50 RvR. It was just soo hard to get templated and masterlevels to compete in level 50 rvr.

     

    So is that what unchained is going to be like in RvR? Are people going to have to get stomped for a month or two to compete?

    ..which is why I didn't do lvl 50 RvR.  It was too steep and too long of a climb to get to a point where you could survive.  Also, if and when you got there, you then had to contend with the people who had been max RR and fully templated for years as well as fully buffed by their bot. 

     

    That's why I loved the BG system in DAoC.  You could still RvR, but you did it in tiers and didn't have to compete with the pro RvR zerg guilds who would swoop in and destroy you.  The BG's were a ton of fun, and I don't understand why there are people here saying "No" to the concept.  The people that have naysayed it haven't given a reason for their opinion, and I'd honestly like to know.  Its not like the BG's ever infringed on any of the hardcore RvR folk's gameplay or agenda.  The people that enjoyed the BG's made it their preferred avenue for RvR, and I think there are a lot of players who'd like to do that again if it was made available.

     

    image
  • OdamanOdaman Satesboro, GAPosts: 194Member
    I'd rather they focus on rvr on a larger scale than throwing out tiny maps to split the population. There might not even be a point in having battlegrounds anyways depending on how progression is implemented. We already know the armor isn't supposed to scale up very much. I liked BGs in daoc, and if there actually is a large power gap then having one for either a tutorial or the first few steps in progression wouldn't be the worst thing. I'd rather avoid the handholding though.
  • TimothyTierlessTimothyTierless Columnist M, ORPosts: 2,163Member Uncommon

    Battlegrounds, at least how they are now days, seem to take away from the game world being impacted. They tend to kill areas of a game and they make me feel like I'm playing an FPS in a small meaningless back and forth that never ends and has 0 consequence.

  • RaunuRaunu Lewisburg, PAPosts: 483Member

    As long as the game is set-up in a way that encourages you to defend your keeps while going and taking more, then no, I would not support any type of battlegrounds.

    I thought I was going to love GW2, however the WvWvW turned into a game where everyone avoids the enemy force and you just trade keeps. To me, this is totally missing the point of PvP and needs to be something that is avoided like the plague.

     

    Your character progression needs to be driven by killing other players. However a 2nd system needs to be in place so that owning a keep benefits your entire realm. In this way, groups are rewarded for killing other players and defending keeps that are under attack.

    - - "What if the hokey pokey really is what it's all about?" - -

  • TelondarielTelondariel Ottawa, ONPosts: 1,001Member
    Originally posted by Odaman
    I'd rather they focus on rvr on a larger scale than throwing out tiny maps to split the population. There might not even be a point in having battlegrounds anyways depending on how progression is implemented. We already know the armor isn't supposed to scale up very much. I liked BGs in daoc, and if there actually is a large power gap then having one for either a tutorial or the first few steps in progression wouldn't be the worst thing. I'd rather avoid the handholding though.

    BG's don't split the population.  There are people that RvR on the large scale, and those that prefer a tighter map, and those that do both.

     

    BG's aren't about handholding.  You log on, enter the zone, and kill or be killed as you try to take the keep or roam around looking for action.  Its still RvR.

    image
  • OdamanOdaman Satesboro, GAPosts: 194Member

    If people are in the BGs they're not in the frontiers, so yes it does split the population whether you choose to admit it or not. The handholding response was more towards someone else than you, but nevertheless the lowbie bgs of daoc were intended to ease you into pvp (and give you some action as you leveled). With no pve levels I still don't see the need to split people up... we'll see though.

  • drakon3drakon3 Liberty Lake, WAPosts: 114Member
    Originally posted by Telondariel

    That's why I loved the BG system in DAoC.  You could still RvR, but you did it in tiers and didn't have to compete with the pro RvR zerg guilds who would swoop in and destroy you.  The BG's were a ton of fun, and I don't understand why there are people here saying "No" to the concept.  The people that have naysayed it haven't given a reason for their opinion, and I'd honestly like to know.  Its not like the BG's ever infringed on any of the hardcore RvR folk's gameplay or agenda.  The people that enjoyed the BG's made it their preferred avenue for RvR, and I think there are a lot of players who'd like to do that again if it was made available.

    The reason is (and they will deny it of course) that they like having low RR cannon fodder to destory.  There are some elite players that truly enjoy a good challange.  But there are a lot that say they do, but really they get a high from destroying people that really have no chance of winning.  So when those people go play in a BG with other people of similar skill and mindset, they complain that BG's have split the population.  (or some other excuse)

  • dynamicipftwdynamicipftw Arrow, ALPosts: 207Member
    Originally posted by Odaman

    If people are in the BGs they're not in the frontiers, so yes it does split the population whether you choose to admit it or not. The handholding response was more towards someone else than you, but nevertheless the lowbie bgs of daoc were intended to ease you into pvp (and give you some action as you leveled). With no pve levels I still don't see the need to split people up... we'll see though.

    You are making no sense at all. In daoc you had pve and bgs to ease you into PvP. In CU we won't have PvE so your solution is to take away the BGs too? 

     

    Also "splitting up" the population is another silly argument. In DAoC on a 1500 people server (cap) you had maybe 300-400 in RvR. The rest were PvEing/idling/in BGs. I never heard anyone say anything bad about BGs.

     

    In WAR the BGs (which are nothing like DAoC BGs) were harmful because 90+% of the population was in them (at launch at least), and the RvR/PvE zones were deserted.

  • Ice-QueenIce-Queen USA, GAPosts: 2,451Member Uncommon
    I absolutely despise the current battlegrounds in mmos. I did however like the ones we had in DAOC. It was fun and nothing like the cratastic battlegrounds we have with games like WoW, Warhammer, Rift, GW2, SWTOR, etc.

    image

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

  • naezgulnaezgul Homer Glen, ILPosts: 374Member
    Originally posted by Fearum

    I have to ask, Why? Why would you need bg's when the whole game is about PvP? Why would you want them and what purpose would they serve when you level yourself on PvP?

    I could really careless if they are in a game because I don't like them. The only ones that were fun and I did enjoy were the ones in DAoC. They were more like a practice for the big game though instead of just a death match like alot of other games use them.

    Because that is what I did in the BG's .....level with pvp......near my level

Sign In or Register to comment.