Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

What this game need is some non-zerg endgame pvp!

JupstoJupsto Member UncommonPosts: 2,075

aoc's pvp is extremely fun, leveling up watching your back, competeing for quest mobs. but once you get to lvl 80 the FFA system gets very dull after a while, this is why I quit.

once you get to lvl 80 the only ongoing populated pvp is kheshetta. theres no other choice or variety. odd considering this is a PvP game. kheshetta is just a total zerg fest, there is no skill or stratergy here. its just the biggest guilds bunching up and wining by numbers.

minigames I hear you say? no they are terrbily implemented in aoc. minigames only support players from the same server only, and with the state of the server, they are always empty. or the same small bunch of people fighting each time meaning no pvp exp. sieges? no they are very rare indeed. only if you are in a big guild, once a week max.

why can't they have something like ongoing sieges but is walk in, walk out. ie, want to do some team based large scale pvp, go to borderkingdoms and join one of the teams. to make them fill up they would be multi server or even server vs server. imagine a ongoing or daily siege between two servers in a zone you can jump into like a mini game. it could be capture objective, or mass CTF  instead. because its a people from different servers each time you would never stop getting pvp like you currently do.

My blog: image

Comments

  • xpiherxpiher Member UncommonPosts: 3,310
    Originally posted by Consensus


    aoc's pvp is extremely fun, leveling up watching your back, competeing for quest mobs. but once you get to lvl 80 the FFA system gets very dull after a while, this is why I quit.
    once you get to lvl 80 the only ongoing populated pvp is kheshetta. theres no other choice or variety. odd considering this is a PvP game. kheshetta is just a total zerg fest, there is no skill or stratergy here. its just the biggest guilds bunching up and wining by numbers.
    minigames I hear you say? no they are terrbily implemented in aoc. minigames only support players from the same server only, and with the state of the server, they are always empty. or the same small bunch of people fighting each time meaning no pvp exp. sieges? no they are very rare indeed. only if you are in a big guild, once a week max.
    why can't they have something like ongoing sieges but is walk in, walk out. ie, want to do some team based large scale pvp, go to borderkingdoms and join one of the teams. to make them fill up they would be multi server or even server vs server. imagine a ongoing or daily siege between two servers in a zone you can jump into like a mini game. it could be capture objective, or mass CTF  instead. because its a people from different servers each time you would never stop getting pvp like you currently do.

     

    Most people don't use tactics even in sieges. Welcome to the lazyness of PvP in most games.

    image
    Games:
    Currently playing:Nothing
    Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
    Past games:
    Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
    Xpiher's GW2
    GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
    Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
    AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
    Warhammer - Xpiher

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730
    Originally posted by Consensus


    aoc's pvp is extremely fun, leveling up watching your back, competeing for quest mobs. but once you get to lvl 80 the FFA system gets very dull after a while, this is why I quit.
    once you get to lvl 80 the only ongoing populated pvp is kheshetta. theres no other choice or variety. odd considering this is a PvP game. kheshetta is just a total zerg fest, there is no skill or stratergy here. its just the biggest guilds bunching up and wining by numbers.
    minigames I hear you say? no they are terrbily implemented in aoc. minigames only support players from the same server only, and with the state of the server, they are always empty. or the same small bunch of people fighting each time meaning no pvp exp. sieges? no they are very rare indeed. only if you are in a big guild, once a week max.
    why can't they have something like ongoing sieges but is walk in, walk out. ie, want to do some team based large scale pvp, go to borderkingdoms and join one of the teams. to make them fill up they would be multi server or even server vs server. imagine a ongoing or daily siege between two servers in a zone you can jump into like a mini game. it could be capture objective, or mass CTF  instead. because its a people from different servers each time you would never stop getting pvp like you currently do.



     

    AoC is not a PvP-centric game.  I know, they said it was going to be, and a lot of the fans of the game still like to make the claim over and over, which seem to be a residual effect of that claim.

    Still, given the way the game is designed, the fact that PvP was so inconsequential that the PvP leveling system wasn't even included until 4 months after launch, and keep sieges being the ONLY guild versus guild PvP option in the game, I don't see how anyone can continue making the false claim that AoC is a "PvP-centric game" with a straight face.

    AoC is a PvE game that has PvP available, like so many others.  PvP is not central to the play of the game.

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  • gantonganton Member UncommonPosts: 304

    What server do you play on?? I know on Cimmeria theres tons of people doing one on one duels. Im sure many people think its lame because its a more gentlemens way of pvp, but it is fun going one on one vs others and really helps you get better at pvp. Its a great way to get pvp exp to, if your good and dont lose every fight.

  • LughsanLughsan Member Posts: 312

    You do realize you can MAKE your own pvp right? 

     

     

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730
    Originally posted by Lughsan


    You do realize you can MAKE your own pvp right? 
     
     



     

    You do realize that people can leave this game for ones that provide more features and functionality than AoC, right?

    Oh, wait, most of the people that tried it already did.  My bad.

    For a game that touted itself as "PvP-centric", it failed miserably to deliver on that claim.  "Do it yourself" PvP is just a nice excuse used by fanbois to try to cover that failure.

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  • xpiherxpiher Member UncommonPosts: 3,310




    Originally posted by Rohn


    Originally posted by Lughsan

    You do realize you can MAKE your own pvp right?




    You do realize that people can leave this game for ones that provide more features and functionality than AoC, right?
    Oh, wait, most of the people that tried it already did. My bad.
    For a game that touted itself as "PvP-centric", it failed miserably to deliver on that claim. "Do it yourself" PvP is just a nice excuse used by fanbois to try to cover that failure.



    And forced factionalism is just a lazy way to offer PvP content.
    Game Developer: You hate these people. Go kill them and we'll give you renown and gear rewards

    Avg Joe player: Awesome I have title for killing Nubs. Lawl I r besterest and get phaw lewt to pwn more nubs. I haxors now
    I'd like to think that the game developer mentioned in this pseudo convo will eventually get slapped in the face and called an idiot. Sorry, but WoW and WAR fail at meaningful PvP my friend. Why do you think 80% of the severs only have PvP going on in "mini games"

    Now, don't think I'm saying that AoC offers much meaningful PvP, but battlekeeps are player generate factionalism is better than that crap. That crap includes leveling. Levels don't prove that you are good at PvP. Yes, the players in the beginning who attain high levels are good, but everyone else can eventually catch up by grinding and time. Case in point, Guild Wars has a hero title that has a max of 15, but are most rank 10 player very good. Nope, they just grind it out using crappy builds or spending 10hrs a day in HA.

    AoC just needs to expand the player generated PvP more and add a unique ladder system. This means including battle towers, controllable resource nodes, areas, ect.

    image
    Games:
    Currently playing:Nothing
    Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
    Past games:
    Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
    Xpiher's GW2
    GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
    Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
    AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
    Warhammer - Xpiher

  • Loke666Loke666 Member EpicPosts: 21,441

    It will be intresting to see what will happen with the PvP once OT common will go live, the idea of fighting on the rooftops will probably make some intresting rouge PvP fights.

    Kheshata is very unsuited for PvP unfortunatly, it is small and not really made for it.

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730
    Originally posted by xpiher




     



    Originally posted by Rohn




    Originally posted by Lughsan



    You do realize you can MAKE your own pvp right?



     






    You do realize that people can leave this game for ones that provide more features and functionality than AoC, right?

    Oh, wait, most of the people that tried it already did. My bad.

    For a game that touted itself as "PvP-centric", it failed miserably to deliver on that claim. "Do it yourself" PvP is just a nice excuse used by fanbois to try to cover that failure.

     



     



    And forced factionalism is just a lazy way to offer PvP content.

    Game Developer: You hate these people. Go kill them and we'll give you renown and gear rewards



    Avg Joe player: Awesome I have title for killing Nubs. Lawl I r besterest and get phaw lewt to pwn more nubs. I haxors now

    I'd like to think that the game developer mentioned in this pseudo convo will eventually get slapped in the face and called an idiot. Sorry, but WoW and WAR fail at meaningful PvP my friend. Why do you think 80% of the severs only have PvP going on in "mini games"

    Now, don't think I'm saying that AoC offers much meaningful PvP, but battlekeeps are player generate factionalism is better than that crap. That crap includes leveling. Levels don't prove that you are good at PvP. Yes, the players in the beginning who attain high levels are good, but everyone else can eventually catch up by grinding and time. Case in point, Guild Wars has a hero title that has a max of 15, but are most rank 10 player very good. Nope, they just grind it out using crappy builds or spending 10hrs a day in HA.

    AoC just needs to expand the player generated PvP more and add a unique ladder system. This means including battle towers, controllable resource nodes, areas, ect.



     

    I disagree.  The lazy way is to provide little to nothing for your players, so "do it yourself" PvP can be thought a virtue.

    The AoC Game Developer: You hate everyone.  Kill everyone else, and we'll give you experience points and gear.  We can't be bothered to develop systems to support you or your guild - we have more important things to do, like bewbies to code.

    Avg. Joe AoC player: Wowzorz, I ken fight club my way up levelz to get phat lewt to kill more better, an git to be a kewl murderer.  I'm L33T!  Letz zerg Kesh again, 'cause there ain't nuthin else to do!  Look... bewbies!!!!!

    Additionally, your observation that battlekeeps provide a mechanism for player generated factionalism is spot on, and proves the point that game systems are better if they provide their players those types of in-game GvG functionality.  In AoC, keep sieges are the only thing provided, which is weak.  Through development, GvG was supposed to be deep and meaningful, which it clearly isn't.  To me, that is probably the most disappointing thing about the game.

    So, in the last couple of months, have you heard anything from a dev, or from Morrison, on a timeline for the further development of the ladder system to which you refer constantly on this and the AoC forum?  What about battle towers? Controllable resource nodes?  And I'm not talking about the odd "oh, and we're thinking about adding these things" type of coming soon crap FC doles out.  I'm talking about definites, and hard data.

    I think I've asked before, but concerning your observations on WAR, what server do you play on, and which faction?

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  • GiveMePvPGiveMePvP Member Posts: 240
    Originally posted by Loke666


    It will be intresting to see what will happen with the PvP once OT common will go live, the idea of fighting on the rooftops will probably make some intresting rouge PvP fights.
    Kheshata is very unsuited for PvP unfortunatly, it is small and not really made for it.

     

    Yea, Kheshatta is my least favorite map and it sucks to have to go there if you want some endgame pvp.

  • xpiherxpiher Member UncommonPosts: 3,310

     



    Originally posted by Rohn


    Originally posted by xpiher

     



     


     

    Originally posted by Rohn


     

    Originally posted by Lughsan

    You do realize you can MAKE your own pvp right?

     

     

     



     



    You do realize that people can leave this game for ones that provide more features and functionality than AoC, right?

    Oh, wait, most of the people that tried it already did. My bad.

    For a game that touted itself as "PvP-centric", it failed miserably to deliver on that claim. "Do it yourself" PvP is just a nice excuse used by fanbois to try to cover that failure.

     

     

     



     

     

    And forced factionalism is just a lazy way to offer PvP content.

    Game Developer: You hate these people. Go kill them and we'll give you renown and gear rewards

    Avg Joe player: Awesome I have title for killing Nubs. Lawl I r besterest and get phaw lewt to pwn more nubs. I haxors now

    I'd like to think that the game developer mentioned in this pseudo convo will eventually get slapped in the face and called an idiot. Sorry, but WoW and WAR fail at meaningful PvP my friend. Why do you think 80% of the severs only have PvP going on in "mini games"

    Now, don't think I'm saying that AoC offers much meaningful PvP, but battlekeeps are player generate factionalism is better than that crap. That crap includes leveling. Levels don't prove that you are good at PvP. Yes, the players in the beginning who attain high levels are good, but everyone else can eventually catch up by grinding and time. Case in point, Guild Wars has a hero title that has a max of 15, but are most rank 10 player very good. Nope, they just grind it out using crappy builds or spending 10hrs a day in HA.

    AoC just needs to expand the player generated PvP more and add a unique ladder system. This means including battle towers, controllable resource nodes, areas, ect.



     

     

    I disagree.  The lazy way is to provide little to nothing for your players, so "do it yourself" PvP can be thought a virtue.

    The AoC Game Developer: You hate everyone.  Kill everyone else, and we'll give you experience points and gear.  We can't be bothered to develop systems to support you or your guild - we have more important things to do, like bewbies to code.

    Avg. Joe AoC player: Wowzorz, I ken fight club my way up levelz to get phat lewt to kill more better, an git to be a kewl murderer.  I'm L33T!  Letz zerg Kesh again, 'cause there ain't nuthin else to do!  Look... bewbies!!!!!

    Additionally, your observation that battlekeeps provide a mechanism for player generated factionalism is spot on, and proves the point that game systems are better if they provide their players those types of in-game GvG functionality.  In AoC, keep sieges are the only thing provided, which is weak.  Through development, GvG was supposed to be deep and meaningful, which it clearly isn't.  To me, that is probably the most disappointing thing about the game.

    So, in the last couple of months, have you heard anything from a dev, or from Morrison, on a timeline for the further development of the ladder system to which you refer constantly on this and the AoC forum?  What about battle towers? Controllable resource nodes?  And I'm not talking about the odd "oh, and we're thinking about adding these things" type of coming soon crap FC doles out.  I'm talking about definites, and hard data.

    I think I've asked before, but concerning your observations on WAR, what server do you play on, and which faction?





     

    I don't play WAR nor have I claimed to have played it. I don't like forced factionalism and I don't like mini game grind. I played it for WAR for about 2 weeks before getting bored. The reason, mini game renown grind which makes time + gear > skill Yawn.

     

    I think AoC has the potential to become greater than it is, but that is yet to be seen. Every time I mention the ladder system, battle towers, and resource nodes here or in the AoC froums I do it as a counter example of how to add meaningful end game PvP with out doing factions or having an arena system. AoC should add it, doesn't mean they are planning on it an I've never claimed they are. However, FC has mentioned to still be actively working on the kingship (alliance) system which will probably see the addition of more PvP options.

    It would be great if they add all of it.

    image
    Games:
    Currently playing:Nothing
    Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
    Past games:
    Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
    Xpiher's GW2
    GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
    Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
    AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
    Warhammer - Xpiher

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730
    Originally posted by xpiher


     

    Originally posted by Rohn


    Originally posted by xpiher
     


     

     
    Originally posted by Rohn

     
    Originally posted by Lughsan
    You do realize you can MAKE your own pvp right?
     

     
     

     



    You do realize that people can leave this game for ones that provide more features and functionality than AoC, right?

    Oh, wait, most of the people that tried it already did. My bad.

    For a game that touted itself as "PvP-centric", it failed miserably to deliver on that claim. "Do it yourself" PvP is just a nice excuse used by fanbois to try to cover that failure.

     

     

     





     

     

    And forced factionalism is just a lazy way to offer PvP content.

    Game Developer: You hate these people. Go kill them and we'll give you renown and gear rewards

    Avg Joe player: Awesome I have title for killing Nubs. Lawl I r besterest and get phaw lewt to pwn more nubs. I haxors now

    I'd like to think that the game developer mentioned in this pseudo convo will eventually get slapped in the face and called an idiot. Sorry, but WoW and WAR fail at meaningful PvP my friend. Why do you think 80% of the severs only have PvP going on in "mini games"

    Now, don't think I'm saying that AoC offers much meaningful PvP, but battlekeeps are player generate factionalism is better than that crap. That crap includes leveling. Levels don't prove that you are good at PvP. Yes, the players in the beginning who attain high levels are good, but everyone else can eventually catch up by grinding and time. Case in point, Guild Wars has a hero title that has a max of 15, but are most rank 10 player very good. Nope, they just grind it out using crappy builds or spending 10hrs a day in HA.

    AoC just needs to expand the player generated PvP more and add a unique ladder system. This means including battle towers, controllable resource nodes, areas, ect.


     

     

    I disagree.  The lazy way is to provide little to nothing for your players, so "do it yourself" PvP can be thought a virtue.

    The AoC Game Developer: You hate everyone.  Kill everyone else, and we'll give you experience points and gear.  We can't be bothered to develop systems to support you or your guild - we have more important things to do, like bewbies to code.

    Avg. Joe AoC player: Wowzorz, I ken fight club my way up levelz to get phat lewt to kill more better, an git to be a kewl murderer.  I'm L33T!  Letz zerg Kesh again, 'cause there ain't nuthin else to do!  Look... bewbies!!!!!

    Additionally, your observation that battlekeeps provide a mechanism for player generated factionalism is spot on, and proves the point that game systems are better if they provide their players those types of in-game GvG functionality.  In AoC, keep sieges are the only thing provided, which is weak.  Through development, GvG was supposed to be deep and meaningful, which it clearly isn't.  To me, that is probably the most disappointing thing about the game.

    So, in the last couple of months, have you heard anything from a dev, or from Morrison, on a timeline for the further development of the ladder system to which you refer constantly on this and the AoC forum?  What about battle towers? Controllable resource nodes?  And I'm not talking about the odd "oh, and we're thinking about adding these things" type of coming soon crap FC doles out.  I'm talking about definites, and hard data.

    I think I've asked before, but concerning your observations on WAR, what server do you play on, and which faction?




     

    I don't play WAR nor have I claimed to have played it. I don't like forced factionalism and I don't like mini game grind. I played it for WAR for about 2 weeks before getting bored. The reason, mini game renown grind which makes time + gear > skill Yawn.

     

    I think AoC has the potential to become greater than it is, but that is yet to be seen. Every time I mention the ladder system, battle towers, and resource nodes here or in the AoC froums I do it as a counter example of how to add meaningful end game PvP with out doing factions or having an arena system. AoC should add it, doesn't mean they are planning on it an I've never claimed they are. However, FC has mentioned to still be actively working on the kingship (alliance) system which will probably see the addition of more PvP options.

    It would be great if they add all of it.



     

    Whether the game has opposing sides built into it (like WoW or WAR), or it has the potential to do so with guilds (the way AoC was supposed to), you will be "forced" to join a faction (i.e. guild) if you desire to engage in these higher end functions.

    So far, AoC has a tiny amount of this functionality included in the game, leaving players little to engage in PvP-wise.

    MMOs are social games.  AoC, without any type of faction or robust GvG systems, feels like a solo game more than a multiplayer game.  There's nothing wrong with soloing, but the lack of systems to support those players that want to engage in larger, more meaningful group events is poor game design, to say the least.

    I agree - I hope they add an extensive range of GvG activities and functions, though I haven't heard them say much about it, or about Kingship recently for that matter.  This is the aspect I was most looking forward to when I started playing the game, and it failed horribly in this regard.

    There's probably no more boring game than AoC, as all the characters are basically stock carbon copies of each other, and character development ends when you can no longer level.  I think they plan on changing that too, which would be a good thing.  Another AoC "square wheel" eliminated....

    EDIT: If you'd cared to play WAR past two weeks, and you were on a good server, you'd probably see the RvR that's going on now that there are plenty of T4 players available.  I participate in it every night on Ostermark.  It's quite fun, and gives the player the sense that they are engaging in something much grander than themselves.

    Besides, what would you say to a person that claimed to "know all" about AoC, and bashed it, when you found out they played it for a whole two weeks?

    I thought so.

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  • xpiherxpiher Member UncommonPosts: 3,310
    Originally posted by Rohn

    Originally posted by xpiher


     

    Originally posted by Rohn


    Originally posted by xpiher
     


     

     
    Originally posted by Rohn

     
    Originally posted by Lughsan
    You do realize you can MAKE your own pvp right?
     

     
     

     



    You do realize that people can leave this game for ones that provide more features and functionality than AoC, right?

    Oh, wait, most of the people that tried it already did. My bad.

    For a game that touted itself as "PvP-centric", it failed miserably to deliver on that claim. "Do it yourself" PvP is just a nice excuse used by fanbois to try to cover that failure.

     

     

     





     

     

    And forced factionalism is just a lazy way to offer PvP content.

    Game Developer: You hate these people. Go kill them and we'll give you renown and gear rewards

    Avg Joe player: Awesome I have title for killing Nubs. Lawl I r besterest and get phaw lewt to pwn more nubs. I haxors now

    I'd like to think that the game developer mentioned in this pseudo convo will eventually get slapped in the face and called an idiot. Sorry, but WoW and WAR fail at meaningful PvP my friend. Why do you think 80% of the severs only have PvP going on in "mini games"

    Now, don't think I'm saying that AoC offers much meaningful PvP, but battlekeeps are player generate factionalism is better than that crap. That crap includes leveling. Levels don't prove that you are good at PvP. Yes, the players in the beginning who attain high levels are good, but everyone else can eventually catch up by grinding and time. Case in point, Guild Wars has a hero title that has a max of 15, but are most rank 10 player very good. Nope, they just grind it out using crappy builds or spending 10hrs a day in HA.

    AoC just needs to expand the player generated PvP more and add a unique ladder system. This means including battle towers, controllable resource nodes, areas, ect.


     

     

    I disagree.  The lazy way is to provide little to nothing for your players, so "do it yourself" PvP can be thought a virtue.

    The AoC Game Developer: You hate everyone.  Kill everyone else, and we'll give you experience points and gear.  We can't be bothered to develop systems to support you or your guild - we have more important things to do, like bewbies to code.

    Avg. Joe AoC player: Wowzorz, I ken fight club my way up levelz to get phat lewt to kill more better, an git to be a kewl murderer.  I'm L33T!  Letz zerg Kesh again, 'cause there ain't nuthin else to do!  Look... bewbies!!!!!

    Additionally, your observation that battlekeeps provide a mechanism for player generated factionalism is spot on, and proves the point that game systems are better if they provide their players those types of in-game GvG functionality.  In AoC, keep sieges are the only thing provided, which is weak.  Through development, GvG was supposed to be deep and meaningful, which it clearly isn't.  To me, that is probably the most disappointing thing about the game.

    So, in the last couple of months, have you heard anything from a dev, or from Morrison, on a timeline for the further development of the ladder system to which you refer constantly on this and the AoC forum?  What about battle towers? Controllable resource nodes?  And I'm not talking about the odd "oh, and we're thinking about adding these things" type of coming soon crap FC doles out.  I'm talking about definites, and hard data.

    I think I've asked before, but concerning your observations on WAR, what server do you play on, and which faction?




     

    I don't play WAR nor have I claimed to have played it. I don't like forced factionalism and I don't like mini game grind. I played it for WAR for about 2 weeks before getting bored. The reason, mini game renown grind which makes time + gear > skill Yawn.

     

    I think AoC has the potential to become greater than it is, but that is yet to be seen. Every time I mention the ladder system, battle towers, and resource nodes here or in the AoC froums I do it as a counter example of how to add meaningful end game PvP with out doing factions or having an arena system. AoC should add it, doesn't mean they are planning on it an I've never claimed they are. However, FC has mentioned to still be actively working on the kingship (alliance) system which will probably see the addition of more PvP options.

    It would be great if they add all of it.



     

    Whether the game has opposing sides built into it (like WoW or WAR), or it has the potential to do so with guilds (the way AoC was supposed to), you will be "forced" to join a faction (i.e. guild) if you desire to engage in these higher end functions.

    So far, AoC has a tiny amount of this functionality included in the game, leaving players little to engage in PvP-wise.

    MMOs are social games.  AoC, without any type of faction or robust GvG systems, feels like a solo game more than a multiplayer game.  There's nothing wrong with soloing, but the lack of systems to support those players that want to engage in larger, more meaningful group events is poor game design, to say the least.

    I agree - I hope they add an extensive range of GvG activities and functions, though I haven't heard them say much about it, or about Kingship recently for that matter.  This is the aspect I was most looking forward to when I started playing the game, and it failed horribly in this regard.

    There's probably no more boring game than AoC, as all the characters are basically stock carbon copies of each other, and character development ends when you can no longer level.  I think they plan on changing that too, which would be a good thing.  Another AoC "square wheel" eliminated....

    EDIT: If you'd cared to play WAR past two weeks, and you were on a good server, you'd probably see the RvR that's going on now that there are plenty of T4 players available.  I participate in it every night on Ostermark.  It's quite fun, and gives the player the sense that they are engaging in something much grander than themselves.

    Besides, what would you say to a person that claimed to "know all" about AoC, and bashed it, when you found out they played it for a whole two weeks?

    I thought so.

     

    Never claimed to know everything about WAR I said I didn't like it. I don't like PvP grind, I don't like forced factionalism (Yea AoC has that to an extent but I can chose who I play with) and I couldn't stand the fact that I could spam 1 skill for the first 15 levels and get top 3 in kills every match. If WAR didn't have a monthly, I'd play it.

    Also, WAR has pretty much no more growth left for it. Sure they can add new maps, classes, gear, and maybe a few different goals for PvP but it will all be the same style that it is now. If you don't like the games basics, why would you like the stuff coming out in the future. However, with AoC people like the basics and look forward to future content adding more and different options. That says somethign about a game IMO.

    image
    Games:
    Currently playing:Nothing
    Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
    Past games:
    Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
    Xpiher's GW2
    GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
    Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
    AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
    Warhammer - Xpiher

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730
    Originally posted by xpiher


     
    Never claimed to know everything about WAR I said I didn't like it. I don't like PvP grind, I don't like forced factionalism (Yea AoC has that to an extent but I can chose who I play with) and I couldn't stand the fact that I could spam 1 skill for the first 15 levels and get top 3 in kills every match. If WAR didn't have a monthly, I'd play it.
    Also, WAR has pretty much no more growth left for it. Sure they can add new maps, classes, gear, and maybe a few different goals for PvP but it will all be the same style that it is now. If you don't like the games basics, why would you like the stuff coming out in the future. However, with AoC people like the basics and look forward to future content adding more and different options. That says somethign about a game IMO.



     

    AoC has a PvP grind that's worse than most games, because of the limited options there are to engage in.

    Objectively speaking, people who like each game, like the "basics" of each game.  But claiming that one game has growth potential while the other doesn't is just biased thinking.  Both have every chance to grow within the basic design philosophies they embrace.

    I guess it's pretty common for a fan of a game to claim that their game has tons of potential, while claiming that perceived competitors don't.  That's both myopic and parochial, but it happens all the time, and is founded in a lack of understanding in the opposition (i.e. "I can't believe anyone would like anything other than MY game, it's perfect, because I enjoy it, and I really know games and what players like....").

    Look, I'm not a particularly a big supporter of AoC in its present form - that much is clear.  I looked forward to the game for about 4 years, so had no reason to dislike it out of the gate.  I'll just say the way it turned out was a huge disappointment - in my mind, they really screwed up what could have been an excellent game.

    And I really do hope they add a lot to it, fill in a lot of the holes, and turn the game into what it should be.  I don't care about sub numbers, just as long as there is at least one well populated server with people to play with.

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

  • xpiherxpiher Member UncommonPosts: 3,310

    Everything I've said is my opinion only. I tell people all the time if they want what WAR has go play WAR. The reason I don't see much growth possible for WAR is partially the players (most only rvr mini game grind) and the fact that the game is factionalism and the goals never really change. Again, I'm not saying that they can't change things and make it better, but they probably won't change the current system much due to it popularity. I see AoC's slate as being pretty much clean and WARs and WoW slate being nearly full.

    image
    Games:
    Currently playing:Nothing
    Will play: Darkfall: Unholy Wars
    Past games:
    Guild Wars 2 - Xpiher Duminous
    Xpiher's GW2
    GW 1 - Xpiher Duminous
    Darkfall - Xpiher Duminous (NA) retired
    AoC - Xpiher (Tyranny) retired
    Warhammer - Xpiher

  • RohnRohn Member UncommonPosts: 3,730

    Heck, that's all either of us can do, is give our opinion.

    I see both games being able to advance and grow in their own way.  Of course, WAR is not going to get away from RVR, because that is the foundation of the game, in the same way AoC won't be adding factions.  WAR does have other things to do as well, which will grow just as the RvR will (and they are working on adding to the RvR stuff within the next month or two, or three).

    Again, the blank slate of AoC is a large part of the problem I had with it.  They were short both content and systems at launch, because they launched well before they were ready.  I think it's silly to give them credit and pat them on the back, as I've seen some people do, for basically fixing and adding the things that should have been in from the start (i.e. the OOM errors, lag spikes, lack of quests/zones, lack of PvP system, terrible crafting system, etc).

    In my view, a lot of the "potential" for the game lies in things that should have been there at launch.  I can't conceive of giving them an attaboy for finally getting around to putting that stuff in.

    WAR isn't perfect either - there probably isn't a game that is perfect for everyone.  Just my opinion, but it does most of the things that I want it to, and has a very good focus on PvP, with the RvR elements really adding the feel of affecting the game world.  While it does have some things to improve, it didn't fail to launch with the Renown system, or with the RvR system.  That's one of the huge holes I feel AoC had in launching without a deep PvP system or a robust GvG system, especially since it claimed it was PvP-centric.

    I do hope they add a lot more GvG to AoC, along with several other things.  That would make the game a lot better, in my opinion.

    Hell hath no fury like an MMORPG player scorned.

Sign In or Register to comment.