I know this issue has been beat to death, but in my opinion Vigil is missing a key element if they follow the WoW 2 faction PvP route. The two games I mentioned on my post realized that 3 factions are necessary to maintain balance.

 

I hope they reconsider

Discuss

Originally posted by Avathos

I know this issue has been beat to death,

 Then why bring it up again?

Originally posted by Avathos

I know this issue has been beat to death, but in my opinion Vigil is missing a key element if they follow the WoW 2 faction PvP route. The two games I mentioned on my post realized that 3 factions are necessary to maintain balance.

 

I hope they reconsider

Discuss

So far what info i have read about this game it is more PVE oriented than PVP compared to Warhammer online. So if there are np open RVR lakes the system might work just like it does in Rift and WOW.

It's a known fact that odd number of factions is the best way to balance any game. I am more curious about how they will get the MMO feeling in a game based in a world where current rules are based on units to batalions size combat. 

If you want 3 faction fights, you have dark age and planetside to tide you over until these other two games come out. If you're just raging against 2 factions because it doesn't fit your vision of 40k, know that games workshop established order and destruction as their de-facto 2 faction split and have been doing so for a LONG time.

Don't try and make excuses, just look it up for yourself or ask a blackshirt. When a fight escalates to this sort of scale, it's one side vs another. Period.

Ok in reference to the topic; I agree i hope Vigil and GW reconsider and make at least 1 more faction for the game. As far as it (3 sides that is) being easier or a common knowledge thing in the industry I think you are in fragglerock. As far as 2 sides to the TT or otherwise you are so full of it it's seeping through my screen. Next time I see a "Blackshirt" wtf ever that is, I assume a GW store employee? I'll ask what they know, last I heard GW updates their game pretty frequently. I mean they just nixed the whole inquisitor armies as a whole and brought back sob. They'll have to redo grey knights codex completely to really add ordo hereticus and hopefully ordo xenon to it. Plus codex changes and updates happen regularly. I personally have never read anywhere in the cannon that it's strictly order vs chaos. I mean it's even hinted at in many books that the emporer received his powers by taking/stealing/tricking a powerful older chaos lord. Not to mention its a TT war game you need to be able to pick a fight with anyone even your own army sometimes, they're commonly refered to as civil war games. All be there are events that have groups of armies team up for fights, but there have been events that had multiple agendas for different armies too. Saying that it's common knowledge 2 sided is just an outright lie. You looking like a fanboi defending the game from good criticism by making your own reality up.

2 factions...lets see here....where have I seen 2 factions fighting before....rome v entire world, axis v allies, england v colonies, north v south.  It's always 2 factions in a war.  Even when you introduce a third party, they inevitibly team up with one side or the other to wipe out one of the three, thus just making it 2 v2 again, and then...back to two facing off again.

 

It's done, they are goin with 2, and 2 it will be.  Let it alone, seriously.

Originally posted by Spalliero
Ok in reference to the topic; I agree i hope Vigil and GW reconsider and make at least 1 more faction for the game. As far as it (3 sides that is) being easier or a common knowledge thing in the industry I think you are in fragglerock. As far as 2 sides to the TT or otherwise you are so full of it it's seeping through my screen. Next time I see a "Blackshirt" wtf ever that is, I assume a GW store employee? I'll ask what they know, last I heard GW updates their game pretty frequently. I mean they just nixed the whole inquisitor armies as a whole and brought back sob. They'll have to redo grey knights codex completely to really add ordo hereticus and hopefully ordo xenon to it. Plus codex changes and updates happen regularly. I personally have never read anywhere in the cannon that it's strictly order vs chaos. I mean it's even hinted at in many books that the emporer received his powers by taking/stealing/tricking a powerful older chaos lord. Not to mention its a TT war game you need to be able to pick a fight with anyone even your own army sometimes, they're commonly refered to as civil war games. All be there are events that have groups of armies team up for fights, but there have been events that had multiple agendas for different armies too. Saying that it's common knowledge 2 sided is just an outright lie. You looking like a fanboi defending the game from good criticism by making your own reality up.

First off, I can tell you've never been to an official games workshop hobby store. If you had, you'd know blackshirts are managers, redshirts are hobby specialists. Managers know just about every rule from at least 2 editions, every bit of lore and which among them are confirmed and which are merely "rumors", and every codex entry. Find a store in your area, and try chatting one up about just how prominent 3 sided fights are featured in 40k. Lore, tabletop or otherwise.

Also, am I reading this right? You're arguing that the game is better suited to 3 sided battles because they update army lore with new codexes? There are so many logical fallacies packed into that rant I can't begin to untangle them all.

In the interest of not drawing this out, I'll sum up the general idea and leave it at that. In the 40k universe, every army is at war  with everyone else. Some armies have long-standing alliances (eldar craftworlds, the Imperium of Man, etc) but for the most part, everyone hates everyone else. However, everyone also has both long term and short term goals that may or may not coincide with that of another army. The most common among these being Chaos wanting to do something chaos-y on an imperial planet without being discovered, so they get some Orkz to go have themselves a fight with weapons the Chaos forces provide.

If they had opposing goals (Orkz having only Chaos to fight instead of Space Marines) they'd kill each other in a heartbeat. But in this hypothetical situation, Chaos isn't going to attack their own pawn, and the Orkz are plenty happy to fight the Imperium with free guns and ammo. They have formed a 40k "Alliance" within the Destruction definition.

A second example, a craftworld defending an ancient machine that holds the warp at bay (sound familiar?) is under attack by both Orkz and Chaos. The Eldar know that they cannot win this fight, but withdrawing will allow Chaos to destroy the sentinel devices and create a second Eye of Terror. They know a battle barge is nearby and they're almost certain the Space Marines will help them, if only to help protect the sentinel devices and prevent Chaos a victory.

These arrangements aren't new. They've been going on for a LONG time now. There's even a chart in the Apocalypse rulebook showing how likely each army is to pair up with another army.

Originally posted by StMichael

Originally posted by Spalliero
Ok in reference to the topic; I agree i hope Vigil and GW reconsider and make at least 1 more faction for the game. As far as it (3 sides that is) being easier or a common knowledge thing in the industry I think you are in fragglerock. As far as 2 sides to the TT or otherwise you are so full of it it's seeping through my screen. Next time I see a "Blackshirt" wtf ever that is, I assume a GW store employee? I'll ask what they know, last I heard GW updates their game pretty frequently. I mean they just nixed the whole inquisitor armies as a whole and brought back sob. They'll have to redo grey knights codex completely to really add ordo hereticus and hopefully ordo xenon to it. Plus codex changes and updates happen regularly. I personally have never read anywhere in the cannon that it's strictly order vs chaos. I mean it's even hinted at in many books that the emporer received his powers by taking/stealing/tricking a powerful older chaos lord. Not to mention its a TT war game you need to be able to pick a fight with anyone even your own army sometimes, they're commonly refered to as civil war games. All be there are events that have groups of armies team up for fights, but there have been events that had multiple agendas for different armies too. Saying that it's common knowledge 2 sided is just an outright lie. You looking like a fanboi defending the game from good criticism by making your own reality up.

First off, I can tell you've never been to an official games workshop hobby store. If you had, you'd know blackshirts are managers, redshirts are hobby specialists. Managers know just about every rule from at least 2 editions, every bit of lore and which among them are confirmed and which are merely "rumors", and every codex entry. Find a store in your area, and try chatting one up about just how prominent 3 sided fights are featured in 40k. Lore, tabletop or otherwise.

Also, am I reading this right? You're arguing that the game is better suited to 3 sided battles because they update army lore with new codexes? There are so many logical fallacies packed into that rant I can't begin to untangle them all.

In the interest of not drawing this out, I'll sum up the general idea and leave it at that. In the 40k universe, every army is at war  with everyone else. Some armies have long-standing alliances (eldar craftworlds, the Imperium of Man, etc) but for the most part, everyone hates everyone else. However, everyone also has both long term and short term goals that may or may not coincide with that of another army. The most common among these being Chaos wanting to do something chaos-y on an imperial planet without being discovered, so they get some Orkz to go have themselves a fight with weapons the Chaos forces provide.

If they had opposing goals (Orkz having only Chaos to fight instead of Space Marines) they'd kill each other in a heartbeat. But in this hypothetical situation, Chaos isn't going to attack their own pawn, and the Orkz are plenty happy to fight the Imperium with free guns and ammo. They have formed a 40k "Alliance" within the Destruction definition.

A second example, a craftworld defending an ancient machine that holds the warp at bay (sound familiar?) is under attack by both Orkz and Chaos. The Eldar know that they cannot win this fight, but withdrawing will allow Chaos to destroy the sentinel devices and create a second Eye of Terror. They know a battle barge is nearby and they're almost certain the Space Marines will help them, if only to help protect the sentinel devices and prevent Chaos a victory.

These arrangements aren't new. They've been going on for a LONG time now. There's even a chart in the Apocalypse rulebook showing how likely each army is to pair up with another army.

 Finally someone with some sense, Well said mate.

You guys are just trolling, I used to help run a hobby shop in Clovis ca. I've been to the frisco GW shop many times. You are talking out you other mouths saying GW manager knows all the rules in at least 2 editions. They don't, the rules aren't always cut and dry hence supplement rules after any release of a rules books. You should ease up your troll role before you make fans of the ip look any more blinded jaded and pompous than you already have. 40k isnt has never been a 2 sided TT game go ask a "Blackshirt" lol. You really do make TT fans look worse and by proxy gamers too. Edit just to add backup to my argument I just called The pleasonton ca store and spoke to Patrick The bottom line runs to this and he quoted the rule book; the emporium of man is falling appart and so what was once the emporium of man vs the universe is now all self interest fights. Here's the number call and ask 1-925-463-1481. THX

Originally posted by Spalliero
emporium of man

You're either doing a terrible job of trolling, or are so grossly unfamiliar with the 40k universe you have no place in any form of discussion about it. Probably both. The rest is an equal amount of tripe, but this exposes it in all its hideous splendor.

Lol you are a troll I'm posting my iPad it's called apple autocorrection. I know it's horrid that's true. I take it you didn't call and talk to the official GW rep, I invite you to call lmao.

I have two stores in driving distance with managers I talk to regularly. With regards to the DMO conflict, they all agree it is befitting of 40k and the live campaigns that have been held: two opposing forces that either want to watch the galaxy burn (destruction) or will do everything they can to prevent that (order). It's that simple.

Hey I gave a name and number, provide the same and then on top of that tell me why the rule book states in the lore that it's free for all. I'll listen unlike you.

Here are some scenarios from the GW website.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1150688a_War_of_the_Ring__The_Assault_on_Glamorgarth

 

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1150687a_Warhammer_40,000__The_Dividing_Line

How many sides do we have in them?  2, 3, 4+.....

Originally posted by Spalliero
Hey I gave a name and number, provide the same and then on top of that tell me why the rule book states in the lore that it's free for all. I'll listen unlike you.

I don't like throwing these people under a bus to be harassed by some person they don't know, but I'm sure they've encountered worse.

Mark Higgins, 714-255-9801

James Bell, 714-892-2973

Ask either of them about dark millennium online or ANY of the major games workshop campaigns. They'll tell you something to the effect of races with similar goals biting the bullet and working together begrudgingly.

Originally posted by waynejr2

Here are some scenarios from the GW website.

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1150688a_War_of_the_Ring__The_Assault_on_Glamorgarth

 

http://www.games-workshop.com/MEDIA_CustomProductCatalog/m1150687a_Warhammer_40,000__The_Dividing_Line

How many sides do we have in them?  2, 3, 4+.....

That first one is lord of the rings, not sure what that has to do with anything. The second one doesn't mention anything about having more than 2 players either. To date, I've seen only 1 officially published games workshop scenario that deals with a 3 sided battle, and it's more along the lines of a small skirmish that went bad rather than a huge 3 sided battle.

Originally posted by StMichael

Originally posted by Spalliero
Hey I gave a name and number, provide the same and then on top of that tell me why the rule book states in the lore that it's free for all. I'll listen unlike you.

I don't like throwing these people under a bus to be harassed by some person they don't know, but I'm sure they've encountered worse.

Mark Higgins, 714-255-9801

James Bell, 714-892-2973

Ask either of them about dark millennium online or ANY of the major games workshop campaigns. They'll tell you something to the effect of races with similar goals biting the bullet and working together begrudgingly.

 

Mark was at lunch so I only got to talk to Joe and he said blatantly that's "it's very much multi-sided." James said and I quote "it's man vs everyone and everyone vs themselves. It's very much a multi-sided thing." I guess that puts that to rest?

I'd love to have heard that conversation. They're going to tell anyone that the game is about everyone fighting everyone else: that's what it is. Everyone's openly at war with everyone. That doesn't mean however that under no circumstances would anyone work with anyone else to achieve a common goal.

You didn't mention Armageddon, Medusa V or Eye of Terror at all, did you?

You don't make Warhammer without PvP, that's plain retarded. "In the Grim Darkness of the Future, There is Only War." Ofc if you wanna make WoW or better yet, Carebear 40k: Happy Millenium online maybe PvP ain't the way to go. Nvm though I'll be happy playing Planetside 2, TSW and GW2, watching from the top as this PoS fails.