Warhammer is slowly getting better but I think war and AoC need a year to even start comparing with wow 

Originally posted by Sarbocabras

 Warhammer is slowly getting better but I think war and AoC need a year to even start comparing with wow 

As much as I hate to say, AoC and WAR will never come close to comparing to WoW subscriptions. They are both PvP based games and WoW's population consists of mainly PvE'rs.

I truly hope that AoC and WAR's subscriptions start to pick up and that they flourish in their respective niche of faction PvP, but I doubt either will ever reach a million subs.

Hehe I meant I'm entering CC details to buy WAR ^^

And I have to say, so far I really like the BGs and the pvp leveling in WAR, and graphics are just my style!

Was a bit disapointed about the classes but I think I'll level my Order hunter (shadow elf something no idea), although I originally wanted to make a chaos tank (god i cant remember all those weird class names) or a black orc, but i just dont like tanks that much, waiting for choppa ;D

Originally posted by Hamrtime2

 

---

Originally posted by Crashloop

---

Originally posted by sprigganny

 

I played both games and its not even close to which one is better from beginning to end......... WAR crushes AOC in just about every category. For the 100th time, AOC suxs.

---

 
Having played both games myself, I would say it's the otherway around. ;)

---

 

Then you would be in that group of around 10% who thinks that.

Having played both, I agree with him. WAR felt like a grind from one Tier to the next. Couple that with how much better looking AoC is, I cancelled my subscription to WAR.

Originally posted by catlana

Originally posted by Hamrtime2

 

---

Originally posted by Crashloop

---

Originally posted by sprigganny

 

I played both games and its not even close to which one is better from beginning to end......... WAR crushes AOC in just about every category. For the 100th time, AOC suxs.

---

 

 
Having played both games myself, I would say it's the otherway around. ;)

---

 

Then you would be in that group of around 10% who thinks that.

 

Having played both, I agree with him. WAR felt like a grind from one Tier to the next. Couple that with how much better looking AoC is, I cancelled my subscription to WAR.

AoC was for the most part linear and a grind...in War you usually have 3 class areas to pick from then 3 zones per class area then 3 PQs per zone...so it's content is more diverse.

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

Well Funcom released a buggy game then they spent 9 months bug fixing and mostly moved on to produce the expansion...so aside from bugs and tech issues not much has changed.  It would be misleading to say otherwise.     

The graphics are fine, Tortage was fine,  starting char customization was good. A core issue was the dire lack of content, which still kills the deal and the lack of focus on PvP or end game PvE.  Then so many annoying game mechanics.      

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

In typical MMOs you can do this in 10 seconds.

cast, cast, cast, cast, cast, cast, cast............taking into consideration cooldowns and what is happening in real time. Though to be fair, usually a pattern will be used.    WoW is supposedly broken atm, I don't play but DPS is to strong, War seemed amazing at this especialy with the energy points system and toned for group PvP.              

In AoC:

Cast 1 3, Cast, e, 2, cast,     So you only have to think 3 times..I played the game it's usually whoever attacks first and gets the stun off.

*  The shield thing and all that extra stuff seems silly, as everyone will preset shields to the specific class....

Though I have yet to see any interesting  PvP from AoC in vids........the sieges and PvP were boring when I played and most of the videos look like shadow boxing matches where rather than random number generators it's luck in who gets the most hits against two moving targets.

Oh! Did FC remove that 30% active dodge that everyone used to have?   That was so fun.

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

AoC had a lot of decent ideas but implemented most of them poorly they also made a lot of poor business decisions, IMO.  Though I don't even fault them anymore for advertising AoC and selling a beta test to 800,000 people.

To the OP: I played AoC but didnt subscribe after the free month. Mainly because I felt it was more a PvE game as I spent most of my time doing PvE than PvP. Then I tried WAR

You could say alot of things about WAR, such as Mythic, outdated gfx and themepark type game but it has many cool and innovative aspects. The most important that it has an easily accessible PvP system that you can use to advance your character INSTEAD of doing PvE.

I have been subscribed to WAR for two months now and I havent leveled any by doing PvE, almost all of my exp has come from PvP and I have now several high level characters. The PvP is fun and rewardable and because of it the griefing aspect really doesnt exist. You can PvP to your hearts extent so there is little need for anyone to grief.

So if you enjoy PvP then I highly recommend WAR. Beside the PvP the PvE is actually pretty cool as well with something called Public Quests. Meaning several, independant groups/individuals can together finish a quest. Awesome idea that works very well.

Now for the bad parts: End Game is pretty boring with lots of stalemates and PvE obstacles that lies in the way of good PvP and so far the End Game is the biggest dissapointment of the game but that might change, who knows. Other than that I think you should try it and remember join scenario ques from level 1, thats the key to advancing your character through PvP.

AoC -vs- War = special olympics event, with the exception that nobody wins anything  

Originally posted by ObliviousX

Originally posted by finaticd

War takes more skills per 10 seconds than AoC...........7 or so VS. 3 per AoC that's because AoC's controls are very dumbed down.  So your argument is War's are bad yet AoC's are 3 times worse? please, Simon says is a joke.

 Every single one of your posts bashes AoC. So i tend to ignore you and your sandy vagina posts. But this is completely retarded. War has the same combat system than any mmo in the past 5 years.

Truth with modification. WARs basic system is the same but it has MANY innovative combat features. Such as:

1. Bright Wizards/Sorcerors building up combustion leading to higher chance to get critical hits and damage as well as higher risk of hurting themselves
2. Archmages getting bonuses to DPS spells by casting HPS and viceversa (granted it is not working properly but they are working on it)
3. Warrior Priests and Disciple of Khaine getting "healing energy" by doing melee which they can use to heal themselves or their allies
4. Tanks being able to use taunt to increase the damage they do to player characters if they choose to ignore them
5. Tanks being able to absorb 50% of damage of a selected allied target giving them more purpose in PvP
6. Several melee characters have different stances which chain of different type of attacks. I.e the Swordmaster use "dance" stances to chain powerful combos
7. Shadow Warriors using different modes which unlocks different type of attacks and buffs ranged or close combat abilities

All these combines make for a very interesting combat that I did not feel at all was possible in AoC. In AoC you chain different combos and spell casters had something called spellweaving which both are interesting features but the classes themselves are not as varied as WAR classes.

Aoc has its problems .. true, but warhammer is by far the most boring p2p mmo outhere.

Aoc lost most of their subscribers because it was and still is unfinished game, but warhammer even though the game had almost 0 bugs and was pretty much finished on release lost equal or even greater number of players beacuse its mindless boring carebare shit.

Aoc is improving and players will raise again, but warhammer would need to change their complete concept of balance, combat mechanic and dynamic of the game ; and I really doubt that will happen.

If any game keeps tweaking classes to where it encourages others to play them, you're going to dislike playing any class you're playing-- as you try to run away from the popular class type of the month.

Probably the most accurate depiction of what exactly is wrong with WoW that I've ever read.

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by ObliviousX

Originally posted by finaticd

War takes more skills per 10 seconds than AoC...........7 or so VS. 3 per AoC that's because AoC's controls are very dumbed down.  So your argument is War's are bad yet AoC's are 3 times worse? please, Simon says is a joke.

 Every single one of your posts bashes AoC. So i tend to ignore you and your sandy vagina posts. But this is completely retarded. War has the same combat system than any mmo in the past 5 years.

 

Truth with modification. WARs basic system is the same but it has MANY innovative combat features. Such as:

 

1. Bright Wizards/Sorcerors building up combustion leading to higher chance to get critical hits and damage as well as higher risk of hurting themselves
2. Archmages getting bonuses to DPS spells by casting HPS and viceversa (granted it is not working properly but they are working on it)
3. Warrior Priests and Disciple of Khaine getting "healing energy" by doing melee which they can use to heal themselves or their allies
4. Tanks being able to use taunt to increase the damage they do to player characters if they choose to ignore them
5. Tanks being able to absorb 50% of damage of a selected allied target giving them more purpose in PvP
6. Several melee characters have different stances which chain of different type of attacks. I.e the Swordmaster use "dance" stances to chain powerful combos
7. Shadow Warriors using different modes which unlocks different type of attacks and buffs ranged or close combat abilities

All these combines make for a very interesting combat that I did not feel at all was possible in AoC. In AoC you chain different combos and spell casters had something called spellweaving which both are interesting features but the classes themselves are not as varied as WAR classes.

But then again there are no arrows on the bow in WAR. Does wonders for your immersion. lol

In AoC, not only do you have a real projectile fight with bolts and arrows, with spray of blood on impact. The arrows also stays in the wounds for the remainder of the fight. There have been times I had 5 to 7 arrows in my back. lol 

Same old threads same old faces! haha

Here is a copy of a post I made in a thread of the same topic just over a year ago and most rings true for me still: (bit of a wall of text)

 Well most rings true still - for me anyway.

I still think AoC's combat system is very refreshing especially from switching from one game to another. This of course was wrote at a time with the info on hand which was mainly that WAR wasn't going to be open RVR as much which all changed. So that needs to be taken into consideration too. I still think it is pretty repetitive.

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by ObliviousX

Originally posted by finaticd

War takes more skills per 10 seconds than AoC...........7 or so VS. 3 per AoC that's because AoC's controls are very dumbed down.  So your argument is War's are bad yet AoC's are 3 times worse? please, Simon says is a joke.

 Every single one of your posts bashes AoC. So i tend to ignore you and your sandy vagina posts. But this is completely retarded. War has the same combat system than any mmo in the past 5 years.

 

Truth with modification. WARs basic system is the same but it has MANY innovative combat features. Such as:

 

1. Bright Wizards/Sorcerors building up combustion leading to higher chance to get critical hits and damage as well as higher risk of hurting themselves
2. Archmages getting bonuses to DPS spells by casting HPS and viceversa (granted it is not working properly but they are working on it)
3. Warrior Priests and Disciple of Khaine getting "healing energy" by doing melee which they can use to heal themselves or their allies
4. Tanks being able to use taunt to increase the damage they do to player characters if they choose to ignore them
5. Tanks being able to absorb 50% of damage of a selected allied target giving them more purpose in PvP
6. Several melee characters have different stances which chain of different type of attacks. I.e the Swordmaster use "dance" stances to chain powerful combos
7. Shadow Warriors using different modes which unlocks different type of attacks and buffs ranged or close combat abilities

All these combines make for a very interesting combat that I did not feel at all was possible in AoC. In AoC you chain different combos and spell casters had something called spellweaving which both are interesting features but the classes themselves are not as varied as WAR classes.

Point 1 - I'm not 100% sure as I never been playing a caster myself, but I do think some of the caster classes in AoC has a similar feature. When spellweaving and using certain spells they will take damage them self, at least that was what I wasa told. However if someone can correct me on this please do so because this is not something I tested myself but heard from others only.

Point 3 - This is not innovative for WAR, Bear shamans had this in AoC since start. The more you fight the better the healing.

Point 6 - This sounds like stances like guardian and Conquerer have that allows them to switch between defensive and frenzy stance.

WAR does have some innovative features but also some features that other games have used before them, so I wouldn't say they are innovative in those ways. Didn't WoW also have stances for melee classes? The classes in WAR are more different due to it being more of them, and I liked that part about WAR.

What totally killed the fun for me in WAR was;

1) Combat compared to WoW and AoC feels slower, it almost feels like there is a general lag on everything you do, no matter caster or not.

2) The worst AI I have seen at times does really make the game less appealing. The AI on some of the mobs almost seemed to be non existant.

3) Public quests was a nice addition, but they are not really any different from doing Villas, the only difference is that you have to have a group do to them. But once you have maxed reputation there is really no point in keep doing them unless you want to level up only on that. Repetative quests are not unusual and I did like WAR's way of handling it. The only problem is if you played in a server where most people was allready max level getting the people needed to do these public quests is as good as close to impossible.

4) Leveling felt slow, grindtastic and quests was at times utter boring. As in AoC there was some quests that was totally kick ass too.  point 1 and 2 totally killed the will to level for me, I got my first char to rank 13 in open beta, early access I got to rank 9 and never activated my free month. When I did activate my free month in february I got to rank 9 again, and same thing happen. It just gets boring, it's pretty safe to say that WAR isn't a game for me.

WAR isn't a bad MMO as it does do some things very nicely, public quests is one of them, I also love how customizable the UI is. But I just found the entire game to bore me to death.

WAR isn't a bad MMO as it does do some things very nicely, public quests is one of them, I also love how customizable the UI is. But I just found the entire game to bore me to death.

I also found WAR lackluster in several areas, but I have plans to revisit the title this summer and assess the changes and see if it's a better experience for me at that time.

That being said, I think it's not so much what games do different that makes them compelling or "better" than one another; but how well they do the things they designed and how well people appreciate/enjoy those elements. 

I like both titles for what they do right; but I also recognize what type of gamer I am and the moment I try to impose my gaming style/preferences into a game that clearly doesn't follow or reward my playstyle; I know I'm setting myself up for disappointment.   I'm not one to invest in either time or money in the hopes that it gets better, but would rather allocate time and money where I am getting the most enjoyment out of it.

In this case, I'll revisit WAR sometime this summer and determine whether it's become more of the game I'd like to play. As for Age of Conan, it appeals to one specific part of my "Bartle" make up and that keeps me interested currently.

Good insights Crash!

I prefer WAR. Endgame in AoC is just too boring for me.

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by ObliviousX

Originally posted by finaticd

War takes more skills per 10 seconds than AoC...........7 or so VS. 3 per AoC that's because AoC's controls are very dumbed down.  So your argument is War's are bad yet AoC's are 3 times worse? please, Simon says is a joke.

 Every single one of your posts bashes AoC. So i tend to ignore you and your sandy vagina posts. But this is completely retarded. War has the same combat system than any mmo in the past 5 years.

 

Truth with modification. WARs basic system is the same but it has MANY innovative combat features. Such as:

 

1. Bright Wizards/Sorcerors building up combustion leading to higher chance to get critical hits and damage as well as higher risk of hurting themselves
2. Archmages getting bonuses to DPS spells by casting HPS and viceversa (granted it is not working properly but they are working on it)
3. Warrior Priests and Disciple of Khaine getting "healing energy" by doing melee which they can use to heal themselves or their allies
4. Tanks being able to use taunt to increase the damage they do to player characters if they choose to ignore them
5. Tanks being able to absorb 50% of damage of a selected allied target giving them more purpose in PvP
6. Several melee characters have different stances which chain of different type of attacks. I.e the Swordmaster use "dance" stances to chain powerful combos
7. Shadow Warriors using different modes which unlocks different type of attacks and buffs ranged or close combat abilities

All these combines make for a very interesting combat that I did not feel at all was possible in AoC. In AoC you chain different combos and spell casters had something called spellweaving which both are interesting features but the classes themselves are not as varied as WAR classes.

 

Point 1 - I'm not 100% sure as I never been playing a caster myself, but I do think some of the caster classes in AoC has a similar feature. When spellweaving and using certain spells they will take damage them self, at least that was what I wasa told. However if someone can correct me on this please do so because this is not something I tested myself but heard from others only.

Point 3 - This is not innovative for WAR, Bear shamans had this in AoC since start. The more you fight the better the healing.

Point 6 - This sounds like stances like guardian and Conquerer have that allows them to switch between defensive and frenzy stance.

WAR does have some innovative features but also some features that other games have used before them, so I wouldn't say they are innovative in those ways. Didn't WoW also have stances for melee classes? The classes in WAR are more different due to it being more of them, and I liked that part about WAR.

What totally killed the fun for me in WAR was;

1) Combat compared to WoW and AoC feels slower, it almost feels like there is a general lag on everything you do, no matter caster or not.

2) The worst AI I have seen at times does really make the game less appealing. The AI on some of the mobs almost seemed to be non existant.

3) Public quests was a nice addition, but they are not really any different from doing Villas, the only difference is that you have to have a group do to them. But once you have maxed reputation there is really no point in keep doing them unless you want to level up only on that. Repetative quests are not unusual and I did like WAR's way of handling it. The only problem is if you played in a server where most people was allready max level getting the people needed to do these public quests is as good as close to impossible.

4) Leveling felt slow, grindtastic and quests was at times utter boring. As in AoC there was some quests that was totally kick ass too.  point 1 and 2 totally killed the will to level for me, I got my first char to rank 13 in open beta, early access I got to rank 9 and never activated my free month. When I did activate my free month in february I got to rank 9 again, and same thing happen. It just gets boring, it's pretty safe to say that WAR isn't a game for me.

WAR isn't a bad MMO as it does do some things very nicely, public quests is one of them, I also love how customizable the UI is. But I just found the entire game to bore me to death.

Just adding some stuff you missed.

4.in AoC it is called frenzy stance (you receive more percent of dmg than in defensive stance and gain 60% damage boost)

5- implemented in AoC and I think it is working (not sure since I don't have a tank)

6. I would say this is stancing, but if not only tanks has it could be useful

7. and most fun when we are talking to soldiers- each soldier class has it's own spell that scales up with the damage your group is doing (guardians- bloody venegance... awesome dps boost when in frenzy oneshotting like crazy - but you have to wait for counter to be maxed) ... I think this is awesome idea, totally revamping the idea of soldier- not just being a tank but furious weapon as well when used right

War is simply a better game than AoC hands down. AoC doesnt even deserve to be in the same sentence as Warhammer. Ive noticed the downtrend in xfire has started for AoC once again. I wonder how soon we will see the "xfire doesnt work for AoC" comments and threads.

 Hmmm ... check xfire. from 48 to 44

Originally posted by nihce

Originally posted by Crashloop

Originally posted by Yamota

Originally posted by ObliviousX

Originally posted by finaticd

War takes more skills per 10 seconds than AoC...........7 or so VS. 3 per AoC that's because AoC's controls are very dumbed down.  So your argument is War's are bad yet AoC's are 3 times worse? please, Simon says is a joke.

 Every single one of your posts bashes AoC. So i tend to ignore you and your sandy vagina posts. But this is completely retarded. War has the same combat system than any mmo in the past 5 years.

 

Truth with modification. WARs basic system is the same but it has MANY innovative combat features. Such as:

 

1. Bright Wizards/Sorcerors building up combustion leading to higher chance to get critical hits and damage as well as higher risk of hurting themselves
2. Archmages getting bonuses to DPS spells by casting HPS and viceversa (granted it is not working properly but they are working on it)
3. Warrior Priests and Disciple of Khaine getting "healing energy" by doing melee which they can use to heal themselves or their allies
4. Tanks being able to use taunt to increase the damage they do to player characters if they choose to ignore them
5. Tanks being able to absorb 50% of damage of a selected allied target giving them more purpose in PvP
6. Several melee characters have different stances which chain of different type of attacks. I.e the Swordmaster use "dance" stances to chain powerful combos
7. Shadow Warriors using different modes which unlocks different type of attacks and buffs ranged or close combat abilities

All these combines make for a very interesting combat that I did not feel at all was possible in AoC. In AoC you chain different combos and spell casters had something called spellweaving which both are interesting features but the classes themselves are not as varied as WAR classes.

 

Point 1 - I'm not 100% sure as I never been playing a caster myself, but I do think some of the caster classes in AoC has a similar feature. When spellweaving and using certain spells they will take damage them self, at least that was what I wasa told. However if someone can correct me on this please do so because this is not something I tested myself but heard from others only.

Point 3 - This is not innovative for WAR, Bear shamans had this in AoC since start. The more you fight the better the healing.

Point 6 - This sounds like stances like guardian and Conquerer have that allows them to switch between defensive and frenzy stance.

WAR does have some innovative features but also some features that other games have used before them, so I wouldn't say they are innovative in those ways. Didn't WoW also have stances for melee classes? The classes in WAR are more different due to it being more of them, and I liked that part about WAR.

What totally killed the fun for me in WAR was;

1) Combat compared to WoW and AoC feels slower, it almost feels like there is a general lag on everything you do, no matter caster or not.

2) The worst AI I have seen at times does really make the game less appealing. The AI on some of the mobs almost seemed to be non existant.

3) Public quests was a nice addition, but they are not really any different from doing Villas, the only difference is that you have to have a group do to them. But once you have maxed reputation there is really no point in keep doing them unless you want to level up only on that. Repetative quests are not unusual and I did like WAR's way of handling it. The only problem is if you played in a server where most people was allready max level getting the people needed to do these public quests is as good as close to impossible.

4) Leveling felt slow, grindtastic and quests was at times utter boring. As in AoC there was some quests that was totally kick ass too.  point 1 and 2 totally killed the will to level for me, I got my first char to rank 13 in open beta, early access I got to rank 9 and never activated my free month. When I did activate my free month in february I got to rank 9 again, and same thing happen. It just gets boring, it's pretty safe to say that WAR isn't a game for me.

WAR isn't a bad MMO as it does do some things very nicely, public quests is one of them, I also love how customizable the UI is. But I just found the entire game to bore me to death.

Just adding some stuff you missed.

4.in AoC it is called frenzy stance (you receive more percent of dmg than in defensive stance and gain 60% damage boost)

I did miss that point, while the soldiers don't use a taunt to increase the damage a soldier not being attacked will be able to go frenzy and start do some serious dps. It isn't quite the same as a taunt, but in a way the effect is the same.

5- implemented in AoC and I think it is working (not sure since I don't have a tank)

Are you sure this is implemented? Because I cannot recall have seen or heard of it, not playing a tank class myself, but none of the soldiers in the guild have been talking about this possibility. will try to remember to ask them later today.

6. I would say this is stancing, but if not only tanks has it could be useful

7. and most fun when we are talking to soldiers- each soldier class has it's own spell that scales up with the damage your group is doing (guardians- bloody venegance... awesome dps boost when in frenzy oneshotting like crazy - but you have to wait for counter to be maxed) ... I think this is awesome idea, totally revamping the idea of soldier- not just being a tank but furious weapon as well when used right

Bear shamans also has lots of buffs that can rocket their dps to the sky, doesn't really use different modes more of different buffs to achieve that effect.

Originally posted by Hamrtime2

War is simply a better game than AoC hands down. AoC doesnt even deserve to be in the same sentence as Warhammer. Ive noticed the downtrend in xfire has started for AoC once again. I wonder how soon we will see the "xfire doesnt work for AoC" comments and threads.

Both WAR and AoC has had daily ups and downs, what you fail to see is the overall picture over weeks and months that does indicate an increase overall. Since AoC hit rock bottom on xfire they have steady been improving the statistics, these improvements are not huge and doesn't means thousands and thousands are running back to the game it means they hit rock bottom and now are moving up again.

Saying WAR is a better game then AoC hands down is like saying Ford is a better car then Volvo. Or saying I have bigger brain then yours.In my mind I might be smarter then you, but if we tok an IQ test it could show different results. A ford might be better then a Volvo, but on different areas the volvo could beat the ford with no problems. What's best is always based on personal preferences Look at the PC vs MAC or Linux vs Windows.