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!

This would be much better with 2 major factions

2

Comments

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,905Member Uncommon
    I don't really like hard-coded factions to begin with so maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just find something very funny in this. While I'll assume it wasn't the OP, every single two faction set-up I've seen has had a huge amount of posters up in arms about how two factions doesn't work, "three is always better". Are we going to see the reverse now, starting with this thread?

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,449Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Distopia
    I don't really like hard-coded factions to begin with so maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just find something very funny in this. While I'll assume it wasn't the OP, every single two faction set-up I've seen has had a huge amount of posters up in arms about how two factions doesn't work, "three is always better". Are we going to see the reverse now, starting with this thread?

    This was often true was the problem. WoW, with ally having Paladin they could do molten core with lower end gear. Where hord did better in PvP with the shaman. SWToR same thing again. Sith were lighting and insta DPS where Jedi were kenitic and the damage would not hit till the graphics landed. ESO has done it right IMO. All classes are open to all races. Should really help with who is better. No one.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • khartokhar3khartokhar3 HannoverPosts: 486Member
    Originally posted by TheScavenger
    Originally posted by Slapshot1188
    Originally posted by Alders

       No one gives a shit about server/faction pride anymore

    Umm... I do...

     

    I guess that should have been the main point in my post, though I did bring it up. Maybe 2 factions wouldn't work either, since someone did bring up that WoW is mostly balanced due to instancing.

     

    But, while there are people with server/faction pride...I even saw it in some larger GW2 servers and the RP-PvP servers in WoW (I played Emerald Dream). However...I'll say it again.

     

    The MMO community (and gaming community in general) in modern times...is very different.

     

    Most/A lot of people will almost always go to the faction that is winning. Heck, when GW2 had free server transfers...almost everyone transferred to the servers that had the best PvPers or who were winning the most. I guess WoW had the same problem in a lot of servers (like Illidan and Tichondrius).

     

    So maybe factions just don't really work at all, in these modern times. Though I never did play WAR, I did hear of very unbalanced sides...but never really looked into it, since not a big fan of the lore of the fantasy version (though I like WAR 40k quite a bit).

     

    But, recent MMOs are a great example of people joining the biggest or/and the most powerful PvP guilds. Along with whatever side is winning. And I guess 2, 3 or 4 or 5 don't make that big of a difference.

     

    With 3, I guess it may be a bit better than 2...but there is a high chance people will go after the weak, easy to kill faction. A lot of modern gamers want easy kills and an easy game. Just take a look at some of the open world deathmatch PvP full loot MMOs. High levels going around pwning level 1s (or in EVE's case, low skilled (actual skill level, not how good/bad they are at the game) players) and newbies to said MMO...no challenge. Just going around pwning everything that is easy to kill.

     

    So, maybe ESO won't attract that...but there is a high chance with these new type of gamers, that two factions will ally and always pwn the weak faction. And then "everyone" joins the winning side(s) and the 3rd faction can't barely do anything. As seen in other games.

     

    But I guess the same can easily be done with 2 factions...and if there is a population cap in one faction (that has been done before), everyone hates it.

     

    well your 2nd post seems to be more thought out than the first one. the first one just sounded like u wanted to troll.

    so im a rvr fan and i actually have played all rvr mmos that have been released the last years. in your first post you claimed that a 2 faction game could work better than a 3 faction game. this is just not true. all the 2 faction games have problems with server balancing. lets take aion or war for example. i have played them both for a long time and the balancing is horrible. u can actually say that on most servers one faction is totally dominatin the other one.

    imo every rvr game will have that problem bc - as some ppl mentioned before - the most gamers are selfish. they will just join the winnin side. they maybe could solve the problem by implementin a 3rd npc faction which always forms an allinace with the weaker one.

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,905Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Distopia
    I don't really like hard-coded factions to begin with so maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just find something very funny in this. While I'll assume it wasn't the OP, every single two faction set-up I've seen has had a huge amount of posters up in arms about how two factions doesn't work, "three is always better". Are we going to see the reverse now, starting with this thread?

    This was often true was the problem. WoW, with ally having Paladin they could do molten core with lower end gear. Where hord did better in PvP with the shaman. SWToR same thing again. Sith were lighting and insta DPS where Jedi were kenitic and the damage would not hit till the graphics landed. ESO has done it right IMO. All classes are open to all races. Should really help with who is better. No one.

    Certainly is true when talking about world (less restricted/controlled) PVP. Especially when one side has more of an appeal to the gamer populace at large, I don't think there's any getting around that without factions being near identical. Even then there's no chance of true balance, there are just too many variables to account for. Forcing new players to only join factions with less players is detrimental toward the whole service.

    As for three being a fix to this, in can be in the right circumstance, but there's still no way to really force that balance. Three factions gives more options so it has that going for it. DAOC's history shows a mix of scenarios taking place, depending on era, as well as server.

    I just hope they give all three factions a good amount of appeal in looks as well as choices.

     

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • TuktzTuktz Atlanta, GAPosts: 299Member

    I dunno what you're talking about. In daoc it was awesome when the two lower pop realms were teaming up on the big one.

     

    Say the big realm with big numbers is invading another realm. The third realm can go invade the big realm's homelands, and the big realm is torn between defending and attacking. It worked so well. =)

     

    With only 2 factions, even the slightest population imbalances starts to take all the fun out of it.

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

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,905Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Tuktz

    I dunno what you're talking about. In daoc it was awesome when the two lower pop realms were teaming up on the big one.

     

    Say the big realm with big numbers is invading another realm. The third realm can go invade the big realm's homelands, and the big realm is torn between defending and attacking. It worked so well. =)

     

    With only 2 factions, even the slightest population imbalances starts to take all the fun out of it.

    A big fear seems to be present results of modern attempts at this, the tactic of splitting the larger force just doesn't happen. Instead they turn into games of musical keeps, where hardly any real conflict happens. WHen it does it's just a "zerg". I remember this starting in SWG near the end of the pre-cu era, and big time during the cu era, fights only happened if one side had more peeps, can't think of a game where that has changed since then. In the early days people liked to ensure a fun fight that could last for hours, as more people joined the genre that spirit was lost.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • jtcgsjtcgs New Port Richey, ILPosts: 1,777Member

    Having factions or the amount of factions has nothing to do with it.

    Its the invisible walls closing them off and forcing race to faction that is wrong in terms of lore and limitaions of game design.

    If anything, the game should have 4 factions...via the imperials.

    “I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  • SirFubarSirFubar SeoulPosts: 397Member
    Originally posted by TheScavenger

    WoW was the first to do only two major factions, instead of three. This worked out much better, for balance.

    I've stopped reading after this. OP couldn't be more wrong and not knowing what he's talking about.

  • TuktzTuktz Atlanta, GAPosts: 299Member

    That's probably just a matter of incentivising splitting the zerg up into smaller groups. In DAOC a lot of times it was more strategic to split up for various objectives. Enemy can't defend everywhere at once very well.

     

    Just gotta make it so maybe you don't get as much pvp points in a zerg too.

     

    I would say 3 factions isn't the reason those recently didn't do so well, but the implementation of parts of it.

     

    Just like 2 factions isn't why WOW has done so well since it's release, but rather how it implemented it.

     

     

    For NON-instanced pvp/rvr/ava though, I'll always think 3 is better than 2.

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

  • VladamyreVladamyre South Shore, KYPosts: 225Member
    Three realms is always better then two. In Dark Age of Camelot I played on the Lancelot server, where the Albs had more then a 2 to 1 advantage of Hibs and Mids combined. Most of the time us Hibs teamed up with the Mids to smash the Albs, and it worked for years. Was the most fun I've ever had in any game so far. Hopefully TESO has gotten it right with the three factions, lets all hope for a great game!

    In a world of sharp knives, you would be a spoon.

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,905Member Uncommon
    @ tuktz... That's certainly a possibility. With more incentives, it might happen, I question whether it's a lack of rewards or ego's that drives such mentalities though. One big thing I remember from my DAOC as well as early SWG days is we didn't care if we lost (my guild(s))

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,449Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Distopia
    I don't really like hard-coded factions to begin with so maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just find something very funny in this. While I'll assume it wasn't the OP, every single two faction set-up I've seen has had a huge amount of posters up in arms about how two factions doesn't work, "three is always better". Are we going to see the reverse now, starting with this thread?

    This was often true was the problem. WoW, with ally having Paladin they could do molten core with lower end gear. Where hord did better in PvP with the shaman. SWToR same thing again. Sith were lighting and insta DPS where Jedi were kenitic and the damage would not hit till the graphics landed. ESO has done it right IMO. All classes are open to all races. Should really help with who is better. No one.

    Certainly is true when talking about world (less restricted/controlled) PVP. Especially when one side has more of an appeal to the gamer populace at large, I don't think there's any getting around that without factions being near identical. Even then there's no chance of true balance, there are just too many variables to account for. Forcing new players to only join factions with less players is detrimental toward the whole service.

    As for three being a fix to this, in can be in the right circumstance, but there's still no way to really force that balance. Three factions gives more options so it has that going for it. DAOC's history shows a mix of scenarios taking place, depending on era, as well as server.

    I just hope they give all three factions a good amount of appeal in looks as well as choices.

     

    Population balance no, I was talking about class balance.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • MysteryBMysteryB Midland, TXPosts: 288Member Uncommon
    You keep comparing it to WoW, lets not forget WoW isnt known for having the best PvP, Dark Age of Camelot was and probably still is the best pvp game and it perfected the 3 faction system. There are ways to balance it out, the game is going to be on 1 MEGA SERVER which means it will automatically switch people channels when fights are to one sided, the devs have explained that.

    Mystery Bounty

  • DistopiaDistopia Baltimore, MDPosts: 16,905Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Distopia
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by Distopia
    I don't really like hard-coded factions to begin with so maybe I'm out of the loop, but I just find something very funny in this. While I'll assume it wasn't the OP, every single two faction set-up I've seen has had a huge amount of posters up in arms about how two factions doesn't work, "three is always better". Are we going to see the reverse now, starting with this thread?

    This was often true was the problem. WoW, with ally having Paladin they could do molten core with lower end gear. Where hord did better in PvP with the shaman. SWToR same thing again. Sith were lighting and insta DPS where Jedi were kenitic and the damage would not hit till the graphics landed. ESO has done it right IMO. All classes are open to all races. Should really help with who is better. No one.

    Certainly is true when talking about world (less restricted/controlled) PVP. Especially when one side has more of an appeal to the gamer populace at large, I don't think there's any getting around that without factions being near identical. Even then there's no chance of true balance, there are just too many variables to account for. Forcing new players to only join factions with less players is detrimental toward the whole service.

    As for three being a fix to this, in can be in the right circumstance, but there's still no way to really force that balance. Three factions gives more options so it has that going for it. DAOC's history shows a mix of scenarios taking place, depending on era, as well as server.

    I just hope they give all three factions a good amount of appeal in looks as well as choices.

     

    Population balance no, I was talking about class balance.

    I was aware of that before I started typing lol..My bad, I have a habit of starting with a thought and just forgetting where it all began.

    For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson

    It is a sign of a defeated man, to attack at ones character in the face of logic and reason- Me

  • sapphensapphen Madison, NCPosts: 911Member Common
    Originally posted by Arun
    3 is just more interesting than 2.

    Heck, I'd would've liked to see 9 factions with each race belonging to their own faction.

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Posts: 5,449Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Arun
    3 is just more interesting than 2.

    Heck, I'd would've liked to see 9 factions with each race belonging to their own faction.

    Most MMOs dont want to take on a 3 faction game because its a lot more work. 9 factions 8O I dont think the devs would know where to start.


    =-D Only on a forum can optimism be called bad and pessimism the good thing =-D Welcome to the internet and forums. 


  • KanethKaneth Posts: 1,925Member Uncommon

    I have to disagree with the OP. Population imbalances in two faction play are not only more common, but have more severe consequences.

    When I played DAoC, Albion clearly had the highest population on my server. However, Hibernia and Midgard weren't too far behind. At the same time, Hibernia and Midgard produced better tactics than just zerging because those realms had to deal with lesser populations. It was also pretty common for Mid and Hib to team up when Alb had superior numbers to both armies. This created a more dynamic battlefield environment, and created more opportunities for better tactics to overcome sheer numbers.

    When I played WoW (quit about a month ago now). My server had a 1.5 to 1 Alliance to Horde ratio for the majority of my time there. For areas such as Wintergrasp or Tol Barad, the alliance's ability to put more numbers into the battlefield guaranteed victory nearly every time. The battlefield was less dynamic, simply because Alliance always had superior numbers. There were numerous servers where population imbalances for Alliance or Horde were 2:1 or greater. A third faction in WoW would have spread the population out more, and the more severe population imbalances probably would not have so readily happened.

    As far as GW2 goes. I would say the three server system in WvW works well, but an extended period of free transfers (which should have ended after a week or two) is what screwed things up more. There was a ton of server hopping going on that really skewed the population numbers. Additionally, not having Oceanic Servers separate from NA servers is problematic as well. Some servers have large guilds from NA and Oceanic regions, which means they have a large force available 24 hours per day, and that works well when those servers are matched up. However, not all servers have large WvW guilds running. My server, Isles of Janthir, seems to be more of an Oceanic server (lots of Aussies), so our WvW force is more active during non-NA peak times. We do well during the day or very late at night, however, when NA peak time rolls around, the Aussies are in non-peak hours, and we don't seem to have many NA WvW guilds, so all the work we did during the day is negated at night, and the servers we are match up against seem to have a decent force 24 hours per day. We've had the same matchup for about a month now. As servers keep losing the three way matchups, more guilds up and move to greener pastures, which only makes the problem worse. So, it's not the 3 faction system that failed GW2's WvW, it's more of an issue of population imbalances of play times and population numbers. If it was a two server matchup, servers with 24 hour forces would completely dominate servers without. If anything, ANet needs to create incentives for guilds to spread out more, and create more balanced server populations.

  • ElRenmazuoElRenmazuo Alexandria, VAPosts: 4,551Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by rojo6934

    i think the game would do better without the 3 player factions (or even 2 like OP says).

     

    Let everyone hang out together in game. All PvE. You would have the freedom to choose to join a real Elder Scroll faction in game (dark brotherhood, thieves, mages, etc) and through them you can do all different types and modes of PvP that would benefit your faction as a hole. Everyone will be neutral out in the world. You can only be flagged for pvp to other faction if you choose to go against them for the overall benefit of your own faction. Once you start looking for trouble you will stay enemy of the members of that faction you offended in some way (giving you the option to redeem yourself and be forgiven by betraying your faction and joiniing them, otherwise you stay enemy to them)

     

    This

  • muffins89muffins89 Yakima, WAPosts: 1,306Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by Nanfoodle
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Arun
    3 is just more interesting than 2.

    Heck, I'd would've liked to see 9 factions with each race belonging to their own faction.

    Most MMOs dont want to take on a 3 faction game because its a lot more work. 9 factions 8O I dont think the devs would know where to start.

    it'd be pretty simple.  get rid of factions and just have guilds.

    I think the prostitute mod corrupted your game files man. -elhefen

  • SentnlSentnl SydneyPosts: 73Member

    Ridiculous.

    I've never seen, in three sided pvp, the two bigger ones pick on the little guy... I've never seen it, I've always seen the two smaller ones, pick on the bigger guy, until the tide changes and it goes back to normal.

    In two faction pvp, you will NEVER experience:

    *Backdooring a fight in progress

    *Being flanked while already in a fight

    *Having three realms stand off against each other, waiting to see who engages first

    *Competition that isn't just back and forth, like you get with two factions (provided the landscape is good)

    ~~

    Not only is there not one benefit of two factions, over three factions - that I can think off... but it's a too simple structure, and I don't think the OP has ever done any serious pvping.

     

    I sometimes play under the alias "Exposed". Don't tell anybody.

  • Caliburn101Caliburn101 LondonPosts: 636Member
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Arun
    3 is just more interesting than 2.

    Heck, I'd would've liked to see 9 factions with each race belonging to their own faction.

    I don't normally dissagree with you sapphen - but a 9-way fight would be a mess, and in any case, would likely polarise into two or three allied factions after a while anyway, and ones much more unstable than would otherwise be.

    Now in a game where everyone was immersed 24/7 that might work - but in a game like this, it's a strong possibility that it would provide an invitation for the 24/7 players to dominate beyond all level of control, and the casuals to leave in droves.

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Arkham, VAPosts: 10,910Member

    Wait a minute here. Every game that comes out with two faction PvP gets ripped apart because it doesn't have three faction PvP. Now people are complaining because a new game is coming out with three faction PvP instead of two faction PvP?

    Is it any wonder that instead of listening to all the suggestions from forums such as these that developers just shrug and make the game they want to make?

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,611Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by tkreep
    Originally posted by rojo6934

    i think the game would do better without the 3 player factions (or even 2 like OP says).

     

    Let everyone hang out together in game. All PvE. You would have the freedom to choose to join a real Elder Scroll faction in game (dark brotherhood, thieves, mages, etc) and through them you can do all different types and modes of PvP that would benefit your faction as a hole. Everyone will be neutral out in the world. You can only be flagged for pvp to other faction if you choose to go against them for the overall benefit of your own faction. Once you start looking for trouble you will stay enemy of the members of that faction you offended in some way (giving you the option to redeem yourself and be forgiven by betraying your faction and joiniing them, otherwise you stay enemy to them)

     

    This

    Very good description of the ESO that wasn't made. They made this one instead--not Darkfall, not Asheron's Call, not Lineage, not Skyrim Online the co-op game.

    I don't know why some people have so much faith that FFA games with few rules always turn out well or have mass appeal. Eve is the exception, not the rule. Most of them degenerate into ugly little niche messes in no time flat.

  • sapphensapphen Madison, NCPosts: 911Member Common
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Arun
    3 is just more interesting than 2.

    Heck, I'd would've liked to see 9 factions with each race belonging to their own faction.

    I don't normally dissagree with you sapphen - but a 9-way fight would be a mess, and in any case, would likely polarise into two or three allied factions after a while anyway, and ones much more unstable than would otherwise be.

    Now in a game where everyone was immersed 24/7 that might work - but in a game like this, it's a strong possibility that it would provide an invitation for the 24/7 players to dominate beyond all level of control, and the casuals to leave in droves.

    Well 9 factions would be too much... if we couldn't temporarily align ourselves with another faction.  There would have to be an intricate system designed around for it to work in any degree but it's a novel idea.

    Another MMO tried something similar a few years back.  They had a whole slew of factions, each faction made alliances with each other and it eventually lead to one massive gang that controlled all the areas.  There would be groups sitting just inside the PvP areas and charge people a toll to enter or they'll spawn camp you.  It was a horrible experience for the players but I have always been intrigued by the system.  It's funny, even in the digital world when given the freedom, we will bully and extort people of a different group.  I can't help to think with a few soft rules and influences, it could've been a great system.

  • IselinIselin Vancouver, BCPosts: 5,611Member Uncommon
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Caliburn101
    Originally posted by sapphen
    Originally posted by Arun
    3 is just more interesting than 2.

    Heck, I'd would've liked to see 9 factions with each race belonging to their own faction.

    I don't normally dissagree with you sapphen - but a 9-way fight would be a mess, and in any case, would likely polarise into two or three allied factions after a while anyway, and ones much more unstable than would otherwise be.

    Now in a game where everyone was immersed 24/7 that might work - but in a game like this, it's a strong possibility that it would provide an invitation for the 24/7 players to dominate beyond all level of control, and the casuals to leave in droves.

    Well 9 factions would be too much... if we couldn't temporarily align ourselves with another faction.  There would have to be an intricate system designed around for it to work in any degree but it's a novel idea.

    Another MMO tried something similar a few years back.  They had a whole slew of factions, each faction made alliances with each other and it eventually lead to one massive gang that controlled all the areas.  There would be groups sitting just inside the PvP areas and charge people a toll to enter or they'll spawn camp you.  It was a horrible experience for the players but I have always been intrigued by the system.  It's funny, even in the digital world when given the freedom, we will bully and extort people of a different group.  I can't help to think with a few soft rules and influences, it could've been a great system.

    Your post reminded me about this classic old study by John Calhoun I first heard about many years ago in university which I've never forgotten. This is the short summary:

    In the early 1960s, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) acquired property in a rural area outside Poolesville, Maryland. The facility that was built on this property housed several research projects, including those headed by Calhoun. It was here that his most famous experiment, the mouse universe, was created.[1] In July 1968 four pairs of mice were introduced into the Utopian universe. The universe was a 9-foot (2.7 m) square metal pen with 54-inch-high (1.4 m) sides. Each side had four groups of four vertical, wire mesh “tunnels”. The “tunnels” gave access to nesting boxes, food hoppers, and water dispensers. There was no shortage of food or water or nesting material. There were no predators. The only adversity was the limit on space.

    Initially the population grew rapidly, doubling every 55 days. The population reached 620 by day 315, after which the population growth dropped markedly. The last surviving birth was on day 600. This period between day 315 and day 600 saw a breakdown in social structure and in normal social behavior. Among the aberrations in behavior were the following: expulsion of young before weaning was complete, wounding of young, inability of dominant males to maintain the defense of their territory and females, aggressive behavior of females, passivity of non-dominant males with increased attacks on each other which were not defended against. After day 600 the social breakdown continued and the population declined toward extinction. During this period females ceased to reproduce. Their male counterparts withdrew completely, never engaging in courtship or fighting. They ate, drank, slept, and groomed themselves – all solitary pursuits. Sleek, healthy coats and an absence of scars characterized these males. They were dubbed “the beautiful ones”.

    The conclusions drawn from this experiment were that when all available space is taken and all social roles filled, competition and the stresses experienced by the individuals will result in a total breakdown in complex social behaviors, ultimately resulting in the demise of the population.

2
Sign In or Register to comment.