Originally posted by Blaad

BTW, as far as I know all keeps require only one door to be knocked down during the process of taking a keep. The fact that you don't even know that once again makes me wonder if you have really played this game much at all.

When did the outer door to the court yard get removed from T4 keeps?  When I last played, there are TWO doors, one at the outer wall and one at the keep itself.  So unless this has been changed, I guess we have to wonder about how much YOU have played the game.  Turn about is fair play my friend, get your facts straight before questioning some else or at least get out of T2 zones.  I apologize in advance if they have removed the outer door, though why they would, I couldn't guess.

Originally posted by Blaad

 

BTW, as far as I know all keeps require only one door to be knocked down during the process of taking a keep. The fact that you don't even know that once again makes me wonder if you have really played this game much at all.

 

Um... T4 much?

1) Door in outer wall, 2) door into main building.

You are clearly entitled to your defense of WAR, but when you question whether I have played -- on the basis of claiming only one door needs to be knocked down -- well... it is bizarre is all.

As the poster above me asked.. how much have you played?

T4 is generally seen as a rather different experience to lower tiers.

In fact, most people having a blast in game right now are having most their fun in the lower tiers. The end game is universally acknowledged still to be unbder construction.

Fortresses are now a little more lag free, but NPCs there still invisible, and the fortress lords are so powerful that almost noone gets past em if there is any defense at all.

Anyhow, as I said in the OP, there is a lot to like. Just needs a bit more fleshing out.. unless you are one of those altaholics who loves messing around in lower tiers.

I really liked the game.  I think the dwarves were done better in this game than any other I've played.  I, too, felt it had some points where it just felt flat... like there was an immersion factor missing somewhere.  I could name a few things that weren't quite doing it for me too, but other people have said it and probably said it better than I could.  But despite those flaws, I still liked the game for the most part.

The bottom line for me, the reason I quit, was that my friends and I managed to pick the worst servers to play on.  We started on Badlands, but the queue was so high that whenever anyone got d/c'd (friend was having computer troubles at the time) they had to wait 10-15 minutes to get back in.  So we switched (don't remember to where because it was one of many).  That server got the free transfer tag,  emptied out fast so we had to switch again.  So we moved, rebuilt the guild, the new server received the free transfer tag, forced us to switch again.  Ironically, one option was to go back to the choice of Badlands... who soon was on the free transfer list too.  The last time we tried to move the guild, it wouldn't let the original guild leader, or any of us for that matter, create a guild.  Every name we tried it said was banned or taken.  Probably just a glitch, but  felt just not worth the hassle.   Having to rename every character and the guild itself 3 times was enough for me.  I might return once things settle down but right now it's not worth the price of admission to me.

T4 is generally seen as a rather different experience to lower tiers.

***********************

Tier 2 - One door

Tier 4 - Two Doors

That's about it.

Originally posted by NightbladeX1

T4 is generally seen as a rather different experience to lower tiers.

***********************

 

Tier 2 - One door

Tier 4 - Two Doors

 

That's about it.

Tier3 has Two Doors as well.

Originally posted by markyturnip

WAR is a positive experiment in MMO-land, and I applaud it.

The graphics are great, IMO, and the races and classes - in look and feel - flavorful. Despite the whines, I feel class balance is not too bad at all. And combat, while nothing spectacular, is fluid enough and can be fun with similalry matched teams.

Overall, there is a lot to like here.

But (the but was inevitable) there are major shortfalls with the current state of the game.

- PVE-land, beyond early levels, is empty. Even on the fuller servers you can gallop around all day and see no-one else out there in T4 pve land. Good luck trying to get people to do high level PQs...

- Scenarios are OK, but repetitive, bland and pretty simple. They are fine as an occasional bit of quick fun, but are rather featureless, and pale when compared, for example, to the WoW BGs in terms of gameplay. (That's clearly my opinion... but the latest keep siege bg in wow is far more exciting than anything on offer here). They remain the main source of xp/renown, and as such are disappointing. Despite some improvement, you will still mostly end up in the same one or two scenarios every time.

- ORVR has improved considerably, but the keeps are basically one size fits all (they all play exactly the same, have exactly the same order of events - beat down a door, beat down another one, then rush up a ramp) and offer very little scope for any strategic or tactical gameplay. Pour in the numbers to bash down the door, guard the postern, possibly cut off the main road. That's really about it. There is only one way in.

Battlefield objectives could be fun (much more varied terrain) but people dont really feel they are worth fighting for, so instead you get the round and round the garden syndrome. It's all rather featureless. You imagine there could be so much more random craziness in the lakes. Smaller scale objectives. Triggerable events. Destructible or interactive scenery. But its pretty feature free right now.

- The PVE sides are kept apart, and the lakes are often hard to get into outside one or two points. For a WAR game, its surprisingly ghettoised. Almost never do you find a small skirmish.. its zerg v zerg or nothing. That is a great shame.

- Gear at end game is very linear and choice free. You need the lesser ward set. Then you need the greater ward set. Everyone chases the same stuff. And it all drops from NPCs, pvp and renown is not enough to progress.

- The contribution system doesn't work.

- The economy is bland.

- There are no guild halls, or other social places to give a sense of pride and belonging. There are no gathering points in the cities, no places to establish a sense of strong realm identity.

- There is not much additional fun stuff, the kind of thing that makes MMOs come alive. No LOTRO music system. No WOW toys and pets. No COX costume shops. No real crafting.

What this adds up to in my humble opinion is a game which still needs a lot of development, and is currently not worth a monthly fee. It was worth the box price. Just not sure what I am paying for on a monthly basis quite yet.

I do think it is one of the better starts for what could eventually be a great game. I will be delighted to pay the fee once it gets over a few humps.

I am not sure what you guys are wanting everyone to do that are subscribing to the game? Quit and join the 1000's of po'd mmorpg.com posters on how no game out today is worth a crap? Warhammer is a good game, its not the best game ever but it has been getting solid ratings, and for goodness its only been out a few months,

Why on earth are they so much hate for a game that has been out a few months? I am not refering just to this post but all the anti war posts, it really just doesnt make sense to me. Now if you where one of the old SWG players who loved their game for years, and then SOE destroyed it with a patch I could understand it. But I really just dont get it for a game that has only been here a few months. Tonight for the first time two servers were full and a waiting queue. This is a good sign. Its not a WOW killer but I think it will be a round a few years..... I am enjoying it, but will give darkfall a chance if its any good, as well as the upcoming star wars game by Bioware.

But seriously theres like 3 types of people postin on the WAR forum, the people who like the game and which are talking to each other about it. The people who come and bash it after a few weeks of gameplay, and the handful of players who has never got to play the game.

One argument I personally find confusing is, what has the fact that the game is new to do with anything? It seems to often be used as a justification for why other people who don't like the game think that way yet why is that? A game is supposed to be good the minute it comes out of the box. (the game that's actually there on the disk at that point)

Yes there's plenty of people that like it in it's current state and think it's fine and there's plenty of people who think vice versa as well but the game being new is not suddenly an excuse to explain away why the other half might not like the game.

Now, if people are comparing the game as it is new now to games as they are now x years after development then the argument has value yet time and time again people seem to use it as a blanket statement regardless of that being true or not.

Originally posted by Raiz1

WAR is worth the subscription fee if you value:

Balanced (but not perfect) class system that promotes team play as well as rewards full investment in one playstyle over another. Tanks tank, dps......you know, healers heal, but there is also room for diversity with the skilled twitch player.

Activity in pvp. From scenarios que'ing every 2-3 minutes, to tiers 2-4 being bolstered with new people every few days, you can't really run out of targets unless you want to take a break. Any fight requires you to get involved and be creative. Large battles are the name of the game in ORvR; not because people just like to zerg, but because small skirmishes often run together into those large battles.

Substantial rewards based on pvp activity. While the contribution system in keep sieges isn't working properly, influence rewards supercede most anything you can get if you like to be out there fighting.

 

WAR is NOT worth the subscription fee if you value:

 

Economy first

Indepth crafting (no blacksmithing, or tailoring, no fletching)

Diversity in look (you will end up looking the same as at least 5 other people no matter what)

Heavy PVE focus (PQs and a couple dungeons is the best you're gonna get

 

 

 

To put it plainly WAR was designed to be a game that rewards pvp. If you don't like to pvp the majority of the time, you have limited space to operate. Eventually you will feel like the game is missing something for you......which it is. It is not a problem with you or with WAR, just a disagreement on what is fun.

Now see I can support this post. Its truth and not misleading. It defines what the game is, and what its not and then people can decide for themselves if they want to play without all the bashing.  Occasionaly someone  will come along and post a nice post showing the positives and negatives about the game without bashing it, has anyone here who hates the game so much even read any of the reviews of the game?

PC Gamer                          86 / 100
GamersHell                      8.5 / 10
PC Format UK                   87 / 100
Game Informer                  8 / 10
PC Zone UK                     92 / 100
Fragland                            80 / 100
GamingTrend                   89 / 100
gamesTM                           8 / 10 

Computer Games RO     85 / 100
Total PC Gaming            8 / 10
Gamers Temple            92 / 100
Gaming Target               8.8 / 10
PALGN                               8 / 10
Game Chronicles             9 / 10
GamerNode                      8 / 10
GameZone                       8.8 / 10
AceGamez                         9 / 10
UGO                                      A
Jolt UK                              8.7 / 10
AtomicGamer                  88 / 100 

Armchair Empire               8 / 10 
Gamervision                     8 / 10 
Game Revolution               A- 

IGN                                       9 / 10
Gameplayer                     8.5 / 10 
1UP                                        B
GameShark                          A-
G4 - X-Play                           5 / 5 
GameSpy                              5 / 5
Cheat Code Central          4.7 / 5 
Gameplanet                        8 / 10
PC Gamer UK                    88 / 100
Eurogamer                          8 / 10 
 

These are not bad scores guys

---

Now see I can support this post. Its truth and not misleading.

---

You really believe that this following quote made by that poster is "truth and not misleading" regarding the MAJORITY of Warhammer's current servers?

---

Activity in pvp. From scenarios que'ing every 2-3 minutes, to tiers 2-4 being bolstered with new people every few days, you can't really run out of targets unless you want to take a break.

---

If so 7Fold, could you tell us how many servers see this as "normal", since you know it is a "truthful and not misleading" statement? How many servers are you guessing DON'T see this as normal everyday action?
You can still see quite a few folks posting all the time that the above quote is NOT the case they are seeing and they are still switching servers looking for this type of fun.

I also don't see a lot of people posting "DO NOT PLAY WARHAMMER!" as you are making it seem like there is. The fact that people post good and bad is just their experience with the game. You'll see way more people just typing what they thought (like the OP) and in the end, saying the game isn't for them, or it's not ready yet than you see someone say "Don't by Warhammer, it sucks plain and simple." But fanbois have a way of "poo-pooing" the worst stuff in Warhammer and ignoring the annoying stuff. You need some balance in a forum, not all "yay! yay!" posts.

Don't confuse critical review with a bash, especially when someone has basis for being critical and points it out plainly and clearly.

I don't even want to get into your "reviewers like it, so it must be good" thing. Reviewers agree 'Sex and the City' is one of the greatest shows ever on TV, and Sarah Jessica Parker is extremely attractive. But I personally think she is a average girl just like the show.

But RAVE reviews! So it's settled: Sex in the City must rock, right?

Originally posted by popinjay

 

---

Now see I can support this post. Its truth and not misleading.

---

 

You really believe that this following quote made by that poster is "truth and not misleading" regarding the MAJORITY of Warhammer's current servers?

 

---

Activity in pvp. From scenarios que'ing every 2-3 minutes, to tiers 2-4 being bolstered with new people every few days, you can't really run out of targets unless you want to take a break.

---

 

If so 7Fold, could you tell us how many servers see this as "normal", since you know it is a "truthful and not misleading" statement? How many servers are you guessing DON'T see this as normal everyday action?
You can still see quite a few folks posting all the time that the above quote is NOT the case they are seeing and they are still switching servers looking for this type of fun.

 

I also don't see a lot of people posting "DO NOT PLAY WARHAMMER!" as you are making it seem like there is. The fact that people post good and bad is just their experience with the game. You'll see way more people just typing what they thought (like the OP) and in the end, saying the game isn't for them, or it's not ready yet than you see someone say "Don't by Warhammer, it sucks plain and simple." But fanbois have a way of "poo-pooing" the worst stuff in Warhammer and ignoring the annoying stuff. You need some balance in a forum, not all "yay! yay!" posts.

Don't confuse critical review with a bash, especially when someone has basis for being critical and points it out plainly and clearly.

I don't even want to get into your "reviewers like it, so it must be good" thing. Reviewers agree 'Sex and the City' is one of the greatest shows ever on TV, and Sarah Jessica Parker is extremely attractive. But I personally think she is a average girl just like the show.

But RAVE reviews! So it's settled: Sex in the City must rock, right?

Hey now you just admitted you watched Sex in the City :P  Also Sex in the City got horrible reviews hehe

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sex_and_the_city_the_movie/

Anyways the servers are getting better, but by no means is this WOW or will ever be WOW. In this day of age you get one shot, then your out the door, EVE being the only exception. I will say I dont think WAR is going to go the way of AOC. And if it does we could be in more trouble because that just adds more subs to WOW.

There is about 19 servers give or take 1. The server I play on Badlands pretty much always has a healthy population with a few queues on peak hours. Other that Dark Crag, Skull Thorne, and Phoenix Throne is were you have the best chance of playing a packed game, in which an MMO is so supposed to be. At least 7 others are in the medium population during peek hours. The rest either are low/med or low/low..... most of the time. Things have picked up significantly in the past month. And when I say that I mean it has more people playing it :).

But lets get one thing straight. I am not calling WAR the holy grail of games. I am just saying its not deserving all the trash talk its receiving after only being out a few months. While its not WOW, it isnt Dark and Light either. Personally I think the game should have 10-12 servers atm. Then they would all be medium high. Thats not bad. As I said this game will not be WOW, but I think it will hang around awhile longer than most and have at least a life DAOC had.

Reviews are good for what they are. When I read 40+ Game review sites giving excellent reviews it means that those 40+ people who are paid to review the game liked it and thought it was worth their time. However if their is a game I really want Ill try it regardless of the review. But reviews have their purpose or well they wouldnt be there would they.

What a bunch BS. Half the stuff in the original post is wrong and innacurate.  I won't even grace this crap with a proper reply.

I just finished the free week, and really enjoyed the game. I don't mind the subscription, but I'll be damned if I am gonna pay 40-50 bucks for a cd-key.

Originally posted by orlac

I just finished the free week, and really enjoyed the game. I don't mind the subscription, but I'll be damned if I am gonna pay 40-50 bucks for a cd-key.

I got one for $13 off ebay, since I already had the client

---

Hey now you just admitted you watched Sex in the City :P Also Sex in the City got horrible reviews hehe

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sex_and_the_city_the_movie/

Anyways the servers are getting better, but by no means is this WOW or will ever be WOW. In this day of age you get one shot, then your out the door, EVE being the only exception. I will say I dont think WAR is going to go the way of AOC. And if it does we could be in more trouble because that just adds more subs to WOW.

There is about 19 servers give or take 1. The server I play on Badlands pretty much always has a healthy population with a few queues on peak hours. Other that Dark Crag, Skull Thorne, and Phoenix Throne is were you have the best chance of playing a packed game, in which an MMO is so supposed to be. At least 7 others are in the medium population during peek hours. The rest either are low/med or low/low..... most of the time. Things have picked up significantly in the past month. And when I say that I mean it has more people playing it :).

But lets get one thing straight. I am not calling WAR the holy grail of games. While its not WOW, it isnt Dark and Light either. Personally I think the game should have 10-12 servers atm. Then they would all be medium high. Thats not bad. As I said this game will not be WOW, but I think it will hang around awhile longer than most and have at least a life DAOC had.

Reviews are good for what they are. When I read 40+ Game review sites giving excellent reviews it means that those 40+ people who are paid to review the game liked it and thought it was worth their time. However if their is a game I really want Ill try it regardless of the review. But reviews have their purpose or well they wouldnt be there would they.

---

Pretty good post 7Fold. Excellent points and expressed well.

Again this part-

---

I am just saying its not deserving all the trash talk its receiving after only being out a few months.

---

Mark Jacobs DID say for consumers (us), reviewers and skeptics to look at Warhammer 6 WEEKS after release. Then he followed by saying look at War again at 6 months out in the same paragraph. That's the head of this baby and that's why people post about the game; he told them to. People posting now are only giving him what he dared/asked for, nothing more.. nothing less.

Very few people who have been critical of Warhammer have said in their same posts to microwave Warhammer. You'd have to agree with that also. Look at this thread as an example. There are numerous critical posts, but how many people in this thread have posted "Scrap Warhammer?" out of them? Fans are overly sensitive about critical comments and the more those fans keep glossing over realities, the more critical posts come out because everyone knows the game isn't totally right. Especially when people start pointing to Game of The Year in a weak year, as if it ranked up there with older MMOs that actually earned that title with better competition.

Fans should understand that basic point as they never, EVER mention that part. They just say its not fair to compare War to Wow. Well, tell that to Mark Jacobs and Paul Barnett who were oft making the comparisions between War/Wow before launch. Fans should send him a post as well regarding his loose tongue, but instead he's praised beyond belief.. practically held to a different standard. Apparantly, it's okay to call attention to yourself and game in a bragadocious manner like MJ does/did, but it's NOT okay to call the braggard on it when he's wrong about things. Somewhat hypocritical that.

If it's not, then who would you blame for daring people to make these comparisions before launch?

Occasionaly someone  will come along and post a nice post showing the positives and negatives about the game without bashing it, has anyone here who hates the game so much even read any of the reviews of the game?

 

PC Gamer                          86 / 100
GamersHell                      8.5 / 10

.. >8 snip

These are not bad scores guys

Neither are the scores for Age of Conan, and we know how that turned out ... 

www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/ageofconanhyborianadventures

Originally posted by NightbladeX1

T4 is generally seen as a rather different experience to lower tiers.

***********************

 

Tier 2 - One door

Tier 4 - Two Doors

 

That's about it.

There is a major difference in terms of crowd control.

This is also a striking thread, although I cant comment as I have not managed to get past a fortress.

http://vnboards.ign.com/warhammer_online_age_of_reckoning_general_board/b22997/109828859/p1/?49

the key difference between WAR and AoC is that unlike failcom Mythic is actually fixing and improving there game.

The OP identifies valid issues with the game and said it in a constructive manner.  However, I simply love the game.  For me this is the best MMO ever made.  I can never do PvE again.

Originally posted by Cryptor

What a bunch BS. Half the stuff in the original post is wrong and innacurate.  I won't even grace this crap with a proper reply.

 

True to your word, you did not.