Well, PvP battles that lasts five seconds can't be much fun.
Unless you actually just want to kill players as fast as possible but then you can stay in the first/third person shooter games.
I really despise the MMORPG devs for wanting these players in their games, it has destroyed the community of WoW, WAR and some others.
I couldn't have said it better myself... Its a shame Dev's have been changing the MMO genre to cater to FPS/MMO hybrid gamers... Today its all about making a half azz gmae that will appeal to people on a larger scale, giving the fans of both fps and fantasy mmo genre half of what they want so the company can make as much money as possible.......
Rallithon Oakthornn (Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
I thought Guild Wars did a good job of Crowd Control. Its been awhile since I played, but I dont think there were any actual stuns.
Some of the CC, I remember:
Pacifism(mez) but breaks on damage.
Knockdowns that were good for interupting, doing extra damage with some follow up skills, but they weren't all that long.
Blind which could make you nearly useless, but a monk usually could remove that pretty quickly if you were communicating well.
Debuffs that did not really prevent you from doing stuff, but make you take hella damage if you decide to continue attacking or temporarily disable the skill you used.
Guild Wars was another game where the monks/healers were fairly tough to kill and took cordination to bring down.
I agree with you in that roles are pretty important as well. I used to be a fan of a more sandbox/skill based game rather that classes, but the problem with those like you said is most people all spec to a similar cookie cutter hybrid and you have no more defined roles really. Roles need to carry over well from PvE to PvP as well. Often in games, tanks have to respec to dps. It was nice in WAR where tanks could actually guard people in PvP and play more like a tank. I still think this could be expanded on. Stuff like "Intercept all damage directed to your defensive target for the next X sec as long as you are within Y yds of them." Vanguard has intercept (have damage hit you instead of your defensive target) skills, but PvP was never really flushed out in that. Taunts are an iffy subject. Some people think they should make it so it forcibly changes the target to the tank and that might work if designed well, but you are getting back to people losing control. Thats why I think the "intercept" mechanic I mentioned would probably work better. It serves a similar purpose to what a taunt would accomplish - make attacks hit you instead of your squishy buddy.
I really enjoy PvP in Ryzom. I think that it is because of the things that you mentioned. I find that I can deal some serious damage when I need to, but at the same time if there is a healer it doesn't matter how much I deal--the battle continues. I am glad that I do have support though. Not to mention the game is PvP important because of the outpost battles between the Kami and the Karavan.
Roles need to carry over well from PvE to PvP as well. Often in games, tanks have to respec to dps. It was nice in WAR where tanks could actually guard people in PvP and play more like a tank. I still think this could be expanded on. Stuff like "Intercept all damage directed to your defensive target for the next X sec as long as you are within Y yds of them." Vanguard has intercept (have damage hit you instead of your defensive target) skills, but PvP was never really flushed out in that. Taunts are an iffy subject. Some people think they should make it so it forcibly changes the target to the tank and that might work if designed well, but you are getting back to people losing control. Thats why I think the "intercept" mechanic I mentioned would probably work better. It serves a similar purpose to what a taunt would accomplish - make attacks hit you instead of your squishy buddy.
That's a perfect example concerning my idea of 'keeping your role'.
In WAR, a tank could stand in a doorway, if he was on the 'stand your ground' ability, guard (share damage with someone) and got heals he was able to survive damage from a full raid (24 people). That's what a tank should be all about, right? It's not that all people could take infinite amounts of damage. The class variety was just a lot bigger and people needed support to survive on the battlefield.
I get the feeling that some of you guys think low dps equals boring battles. All I can say there is that WAR had some of the most exciting battles I've ever taken part in. Particularly _because_ the battles took longer, a good keepfight could last for an hour or so, people would push through to the inner hall and be driven back out, just to regroup and storm again.
Remembering larger PvP fights in WoW or LotRO I basically see myself steamrolled or steamrolling guys with the losing party not standing a chance. At all.
Wanna emphasize again that I don't think WAR is the be all end all of team-oriented PvP. It just got some things right, and making PvP fun for the not-dps-player was one of them.
Roles need to carry over well from PvE to PvP as well. Often in games, tanks have to respec to dps. It was nice in WAR where tanks could actually guard people in PvP and play more like a tank. I still think this could be expanded on. Stuff like "Intercept all damage directed to your defensive target for the next X sec as long as you are within Y yds of them." Vanguard has intercept (have damage hit you instead of your defensive target) skills, but PvP was never really flushed out in that. Taunts are an iffy subject. Some people think they should make it so it forcibly changes the target to the tank and that might work if designed well, but you are getting back to people losing control. Thats why I think the "intercept" mechanic I mentioned would probably work better. It serves a similar purpose to what a taunt would accomplish - make attacks hit you instead of your squishy buddy.
I get the feeling that some of you guys think low dps equals boring battles. All I can say there is that WAR had some of the most exciting battles I've ever taken part in. Particularly _because_ the battles took longer, a good keepfight could last for an hour or so, people would push through to the inner hall and be driven back out, just to regroup and storm again.
Theres a reason for that, its because all you have to do is run back and turtle on the keep lord to make it 10x harder for teh offense.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling" Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
Remembering larger PvP fights in WoW or LotRO I basically see myself steamrolled or steamrolling guys with the losing party not standing a chance. At all. Wanna emphasize again that I don't think WAR is the be all end all of team-oriented PvP. It just got some things right, and making PvP fun for the not-dps-player was one of them. M
I remember the old skirmishes at Tarren Mill/Southshore, before BGs existed... they were pretty much a kind of "napoleon-age warfare" where 2 lines exchanged rounds of fire (spells, bullets, arrows) till one of them started breaking and routed as soon as they weakened and a wave of "cavalry" melee started charging from the other side (was also a bit of "nerves game", if you were melee and started charging a bit too soon, you'd meet an untimely end in a solid barrage of fire instead of definitely routing the enemy)...
There was little CC at that tima and... well, it was damn fun! Then BGs came out and nobody ever fought at Tarren Mill/Southshore
PvP is generally an afterthought in most mmog's. Best PvP in an mmo that I have found was in PlanetSide, though they messed that up sad to say, and is long since dead. WWII Online was good too, but of course it's more like a sim so a whole lot slower which isn't appealing to many including the fee as sim players get by with simple network play. I liked PvP in UO, not the regular stuff but the PvP that our guild alliance strictly regulated. I prefer big-scale battles, yet most mmog's are small engagements, duels or arenas. Oh and SWG was good long ago with the GCW, but they finally killed that at least at the time of my departure (at NGE). But the best will always be dedicated to PvP, yet less players means not as attractive to make. There are other examples...
Comments
I couldn't have said it better myself... Its a shame Dev's have been changing the MMO genre to cater to FPS/MMO hybrid gamers... Today its all about making a half azz gmae that will appeal to people on a larger scale, giving the fans of both fps and fantasy mmo genre half of what they want so the company can make as much money as possible.......
Rallithon Oakthornn
(Retired Heirophant of the 60th season)
I thought Guild Wars did a good job of Crowd Control. Its been awhile since I played, but I dont think there were any actual stuns.
Some of the CC, I remember:
Pacifism(mez) but breaks on damage.
Knockdowns that were good for interupting, doing extra damage with some follow up skills, but they weren't all that long.
Blind which could make you nearly useless, but a monk usually could remove that pretty quickly if you were communicating well.
Debuffs that did not really prevent you from doing stuff, but make you take hella damage if you decide to continue attacking or temporarily disable the skill you used.
Guild Wars was another game where the monks/healers were fairly tough to kill and took cordination to bring down.
I agree with you in that roles are pretty important as well. I used to be a fan of a more sandbox/skill based game rather that classes, but the problem with those like you said is most people all spec to a similar cookie cutter hybrid and you have no more defined roles really. Roles need to carry over well from PvE to PvP as well. Often in games, tanks have to respec to dps. It was nice in WAR where tanks could actually guard people in PvP and play more like a tank. I still think this could be expanded on. Stuff like "Intercept all damage directed to your defensive target for the next X sec as long as you are within Y yds of them." Vanguard has intercept (have damage hit you instead of your defensive target) skills, but PvP was never really flushed out in that. Taunts are an iffy subject. Some people think they should make it so it forcibly changes the target to the tank and that might work if designed well, but you are getting back to people losing control. Thats why I think the "intercept" mechanic I mentioned would probably work better. It serves a similar purpose to what a taunt would accomplish - make attacks hit you instead of your squishy buddy.
I really enjoy PvP in Ryzom. I think that it is because of the things that you mentioned. I find that I can deal some serious damage when I need to, but at the same time if there is a healer it doesn't matter how much I deal--the battle continues. I am glad that I do have support though. Not to mention the game is PvP important because of the outpost battles between the Kami and the Karavan.
www.ryzom.com
That's a perfect example concerning my idea of 'keeping your role'.
In WAR, a tank could stand in a doorway, if he was on the 'stand your ground' ability, guard (share damage with someone) and got heals he was able to survive damage from a full raid (24 people). That's what a tank should be all about, right? It's not that all people could take infinite amounts of damage. The class variety was just a lot bigger and people needed support to survive on the battlefield.
I get the feeling that some of you guys think low dps equals boring battles. All I can say there is that WAR had some of the most exciting battles I've ever taken part in. Particularly _because_ the battles took longer, a good keepfight could last for an hour or so, people would push through to the inner hall and be driven back out, just to regroup and storm again.
Remembering larger PvP fights in WoW or LotRO I basically see myself steamrolled or steamrolling guys with the losing party not standing a chance. At all.
Wanna emphasize again that I don't think WAR is the be all end all of team-oriented PvP. It just got some things right, and making PvP fun for the not-dps-player was one of them.
M
Theres a reason for that, its because all you have to do is run back and turtle on the keep lord to make it 10x harder for teh offense.
Apparently stating the truth in my sig is "trolling"
Sig typo fixed thanks to an observant stragen001.
I remember the old skirmishes at Tarren Mill/Southshore, before BGs existed... they were pretty much a kind of "napoleon-age warfare" where 2 lines exchanged rounds of fire (spells, bullets, arrows) till one of them started breaking and routed as soon as they weakened and a wave of "cavalry" melee started charging from the other side (was also a bit of "nerves game", if you were melee and started charging a bit too soon, you'd meet an untimely end in a solid barrage of fire instead of definitely routing the enemy)...
There was little CC at that tima and... well, it was damn fun! Then BGs came out and nobody ever fought at Tarren Mill/Southshore
PvP is generally an afterthought in most mmog's. Best PvP in an mmo that I have found was in PlanetSide, though they messed that up sad to say, and is long since dead. WWII Online was good too, but of course it's more like a sim so a whole lot slower which isn't appealing to many including the fee as sim players get by with simple network play. I liked PvP in UO, not the regular stuff but the PvP that our guild alliance strictly regulated. I prefer big-scale battles, yet most mmog's are small engagements, duels or arenas. Oh and SWG was good long ago with the GCW, but they finally killed that at least at the time of my departure (at NGE). But the best will always be dedicated to PvP, yet less players means not as attractive to make. There are other examples...
M59, UO, EQ1, WWIIOL, PS, EnB, SL, SWG. MoM, EQ2, AO, SB, CoH, LOTRO, WoW, DDO+ f2p's, Demos & indie alpha's.