Originally posted by colddog04

Originally posted by Brohime

DAoC Battlegrounds were the best, I actually prefered their battlegrounds to 50 RvR. It was just soo hard to get templated and masterlevels to compete in level 50 rvr.

 

So is that what unchained is going to be like in RvR? Are people going to have to get stomped for a month or two to compete?

..which is why I didn't do lvl 50 RvR.  It was too steep and too long of a climb to get to a point where you could survive.  Also, if and when you got there, you then had to contend with the people who had been max RR and fully templated for years as well as fully buffed by their bot. 

That's why I loved the BG system in DAoC.  You could still RvR, but you did it in tiers and didn't have to compete with the pro RvR zerg guilds who would swoop in and destroy you.  The BG's were a ton of fun, and I don't understand why there are people here saying "No" to the concept.  The people that have naysayed it haven't given a reason for their opinion, and I'd honestly like to know.  Its not like the BG's ever infringed on any of the hardcore RvR folk's gameplay or agenda.  The people that enjoyed the BG's made it their preferred avenue for RvR, and I think there are a lot of players who'd like to do that again if it was made available.

Battlegrounds, at least how they are now days, seem to take away from the game world being impacted. They tend to kill areas of a game and they make me feel like I'm playing an FPS in a small meaningless back and forth that never ends and has 0 consequence.

As long as the game is set-up in a way that encourages you to defend your keeps while going and taking more, then no, I would not support any type of battlegrounds.

I thought I was going to love GW2, however the WvWvW turned into a game where everyone avoids the enemy force and you just trade keeps. To me, this is totally missing the point of PvP and needs to be something that is avoided like the plague.

Your character progression needs to be driven by killing other players. However a 2nd system needs to be in place so that owning a keep benefits your entire realm. In this way, groups are rewarded for killing other players and defending keeps that are under attack.

Originally posted by Odaman
I'd rather they focus on rvr on a larger scale than throwing out tiny maps to split the population. There might not even be a point in having battlegrounds anyways depending on how progression is implemented. We already know the armor isn't supposed to scale up very much. I liked BGs in daoc, and if there actually is a large power gap then having one for either a tutorial or the first few steps in progression wouldn't be the worst thing. I'd rather avoid the handholding though.

BG's don't split the population.  There are people that RvR on the large scale, and those that prefer a tighter map, and those that do both.

BG's aren't about handholding.  You log on, enter the zone, and kill or be killed as you try to take the keep or roam around looking for action.  Its still RvR.

If people are in the BGs they're not in the frontiers, so yes it does split the population whether you choose to admit it or not. The handholding response was more towards someone else than you, but nevertheless the lowbie bgs of daoc were intended to ease you into pvp (and give you some action as you leveled). With no pve levels I still don't see the need to split people up... we'll see though.

Originally posted by Telondariel

That's why I loved the BG system in DAoC.  You could still RvR, but you did it in tiers and didn't have to compete with the pro RvR zerg guilds who would swoop in and destroy you.  The BG's were a ton of fun, and I don't understand why there are people here saying "No" to the concept.  The people that have naysayed it haven't given a reason for their opinion, and I'd honestly like to know.  Its not like the BG's ever infringed on any of the hardcore RvR folk's gameplay or agenda.  The people that enjoyed the BG's made it their preferred avenue for RvR, and I think there are a lot of players who'd like to do that again if it was made available.

The reason is (and they will deny it of course) that they like having low RR cannon fodder to destory.  There are some elite players that truly enjoy a good challange.  But there are a lot that say they do, but really they get a high from destroying people that really have no chance of winning.  So when those people go play in a BG with other people of similar skill and mindset, they complain that BG's have split the population.  (or some other excuse)

Originally posted by Odaman

If people are in the BGs they're not in the frontiers, so yes it does split the population whether you choose to admit it or not. The handholding response was more towards someone else than you, but nevertheless the lowbie bgs of daoc were intended to ease you into pvp (and give you some action as you leveled). With no pve levels I still don't see the need to split people up... we'll see though.

You are making no sense at all. In daoc you had pve and bgs to ease you into PvP. In CU we won't have PvE so your solution is to take away the BGs too? 

Also "splitting up" the population is another silly argument. In DAoC on a 1500 people server (cap) you had maybe 300-400 in RvR. The rest were PvEing/idling/in BGs. I never heard anyone say anything bad about BGs.

In WAR the BGs (which are nothing like DAoC BGs) were harmful because 90+% of the population was in them (at launch at least), and the RvR/PvE zones were deserted.

Originally posted by Fearum

I have to ask, Why? Why would you need bg's when the whole game is about PvP? Why would you want them and what purpose would they serve when you level yourself on PvP?

I could really careless if they are in a game because I don't like them. The only ones that were fun and I did enjoy were the ones in DAoC. They were more like a practice for the big game though instead of just a death match like alot of other games use them.

Because that is what I did in the BG's .....level with pvp......near my level

Originally posted by naezgul

Originally posted by Fearum

I have to ask, Why? Why would you need bg's when the whole game is about PvP? Why would you want them and what purpose would they serve when you level yourself on PvP?

I could really careless if they are in a game because I don't like them. The only ones that were fun and I did enjoy were the ones in DAoC. They were more like a practice for the big game though instead of just a death match like alot of other games use them.

Because that is what I did in the BG's .....level with pvp......near my level

Originally posted by PerfArt
This isn't related to CU specifically because the design of CU has no need of BGs... But holy hell if Thidranki was not more fun than anyone should be allowed to have.

Say what you will about it's effects on big boy RvR. You will have some valid points. Say what you will about the direction that the BGs took the game in. Again, valid points will be made.

But holy SHIT was Thidranki FUN. Hell, if Thid was the endgame, I would have been happy. I liked the BGs that much. Even Caledonia was fun. Thid just appealed to me because that's when classes started being what they were supposed to be, but didn't yet have any "i win" buttons.

***

Thidranki is my single fondest memory of an mmo.
I am not sure what dark gods Mythic sacrificed children to in order to acheive this, but "THANK YOU DARK GODS!"

Best of times.
 

QFT.  QFE, even.  Even after the whole ToA thing, Thidranki kept pulling me back to the game off and on for years.

Originally posted by grimjakk

QFT.  QFE, even.  Even after the whole ToA thing, Thidranki kept pulling me back to the game off and on for years.

Thidranki was the ONLY thing that kept me subbing for as long as I did.  Sure I enjoyed OF/NF a ton.  But Thid is what kept me subbing on and off for 6+ years.  Without Thid I would probably have subbed for a year, maybe two at most. 

In WAR, a lot of the problems with RvR might have been fixed if people were only participating in thee RvR lakes, but people preferred to use the battlegrounds, because it was a faster way to level.

For a game based on PvP, I think battlegrounds are a bad idea. You want as many people as possible out in the fields of the main land as possible, and you want systems that drive people to WANT to be there.

You can't have distractions like BG's if you want the game to last.

It seems most people ITT don't understand the differences between WoW/GW2/WAR BGs and DAoC BGs.

Here's a handy chart:

Here is a handy map: http://www.valmerwolf.com/mappe/BG/bg-thidranki.jpg 

In essence DAoC BGs are just like RvR but in a smaller map. They are more balanced than 50 RvR though which makes them great for new players to learn the game without having to face veterans who will probably crush them with their superior items/progression/teamwork/experience etc.

Some players even prefer DAoC BGs to level 50 RvR for various reasons (it's more casual, more balanced, they may not care about progression etc.)

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

It seems most people ITT don't understand the differences between WoW/GW2/WAR BGs and DAoC BGs.

Here's a handy chart:

.....

Originally posted by dynamicipftw

It seems most people ITT don't understand the differences between WoW/GW2/WAR BGs and DAoC BGs.

Here's a handy chart:

DAoC BGs	WoW/GW2/WAR BGs
3 sides	2 sides
not instanced	instanced
never ends	ends after a few minutes
there is no winner	there is a winner (99.9% of the time)
RvR	not RvR
uneven numbers	even numbers
no score or k/d ratio or stats	has all of those
has central keep	doesn't
multiple playstyles (zerging/8v8/soloing)	one or two playstyles
you get to know your allies and enemies	you play with and against randoms
you need to form your own groups	automatic grouping
casual/fun PvP	all about winning (people usually rage when they lose)
you progress by killing enemies	you progress by winning the bg (kills aren't important)
you can make your own luck	if your team sucks you can't make a difference
big map and more players (in prime time)	small map, few players

Here is a handy map: http://www.valmerwolf.com/mappe/BG/bg-thidranki.jpg 

 

In essence DAoC BGs are just like RvR but in a smaller map. They are more balanced than 50 RvR though which makes them great for new players to learn the game without having to face veterans who will probably crush them with their superior items/progression/teamwork/experience etc.

Some players even prefer DAoC BGs to level 50 RvR for various reasons (it's more casual, more balanced, they may not care about progression etc.)

And your not playing tag or planting a bomb!

why is everyone assuming there are no levels?  Mark said not traditional leveling!! This could mean a ton of things.

also, if there are no levels the difference between a newly created toon and someone playing two years is not gonna be that great. Or else you would have no chance jumping into the fire!

why is everyone assuming there are no levels?  Mark said not traditional leveling!! This could mean a ton of things.

also, if there are no levels the difference between a newly created toon and someone playing two years is not gonna be that great. Or else you would have no chance jumping into the fire!

MJ quote:

"...we want players to get into RvR right from the beginning of their journey in CU. We want to create a system where a high level character is better than he was, better…faster…stronger… than a low level player but it should also not be a system (if we want to have a truly open world) where the high level player sneezes and the low level player is scattered to the four winds. You must be able to have actual RvR in an RvR-focused game and that means that the cavernous gulf of disparity between characters that can be found in other games must not be part of the system here. Again, being a more experienced player will come with tons of perks, benefits, abilities, etc. but it should not be instant death to see somebody a bit more powerful than you coming at you if we want this game to succeed."

I like the sound of this, and it would not make any sense to have "levels" in the traditional sense. Plenty of progression/disparity can be achieved through stats/styles/abilities/equipment.

No BGs.

RvR should be one big playground for all levels, so no need to disperse people in some playground miniRvR zones.

Having a system to level in RvR would be defied by having some BG zones where people level differently or play differently than in real RvR.

***

For the I-wanna-insta-action, I-don't-wanna-wait crowd:

"But but but.... I don't want to eat dirt 1, 2 or 3 months in big boy RvR until I reach the highest level and be able to "compete", I want insta action!!"

Well, this seems to be a wrong game for that.