Trending Games | ArcheAge | Elder Scrolls Online | Star Wars: The Old Republic | World of Warcraft

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,922,592 Users Online:0
Games:760  Posts:6,315,453
Zenimax Online Studios | Official Site
MMORPG | Genre:Fantasy | Status:Final  (rel 04/04/14)  | Pub:Bethesda Softworks
Distribution: | Retail Price:$59.99 | Pay Type:Subscription
System Req: PC Mac Playstation 4 Xbox One | Out of date info? Let us know!

Elder Scrolls Online Forum » General Discussion » ESO devs: If you want to get open world PvP "right" read this...

8 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search
144 posts found
  Ramanadjinn

Novice Member

Joined: 8/08/11
Posts: 1316

1/23/13 1:20:54 PM#21
Originally posted by boxsnd
Originally posted by mmoguy43

Great thread! I love it when someone goes into detail of pros/cons of MMOs I didn't get a chance to play. I wonder how you'd figure in how Aion does PvP if you have played that too.

One thing I don't get is why do you say 8 player groups are always better compared to other games with 6. Is it simply easier to manage them compared to having an raid of 1 group +2?

I played aion for about 3 minutes. It just wasn't for me.

 

8 players in a group just have much better odds of taking on a zerg compared to a 5-6man group. 8 people are like a little zerg of their own.

 

Why not 10?

Surely the extra 2 would help out!

(My actual point being this number in a vaccum is just an arbitrary number.  Great game design means the game system works well with the group number given, whatever that number is, or there is an innovative approach to grouping altogether.)

  eric_w66

Apprentice Member

Joined: 1/12/06
Posts: 1009

1/23/13 1:25:53 PM#22

"First of we all know that this type of PvP started with DAoC, and (pre-ToA) DAoC is considered by most people as the best PvP game of all time."

Problem with this is it is a false premise. "Most" people don't consider DAOC to have been successful in PvP. One realm dominated the other two on most servers, they had to encourage people to move to lower pop sides servers with pre-leveled chars with gear, etc. That's not success.  That's patching failure.  The people who do consider DAOC to be the best PvP game of all time, look back on it with rose-tinted glasses and forget all the frustration the game gave them.

Best PvP game I've ever played was Tribes 1.0, prior to the rampant cheating/hacks.  Then, after that, Pong.

  mmoguy43

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 3/31/09
Posts: 2354

1/23/13 1:27:01 PM#23
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
Originally posted by boxsnd
Originally posted by mmoguy43

Great thread! I love it when someone goes into detail of pros/cons of MMOs I didn't get a chance to play. I wonder how you'd figure in how Aion does PvP if you have played that too.

One thing I don't get is why do you say 8 player groups are always better compared to other games with 6. Is it simply easier to manage them compared to having an raid of 1 group +2?

I played aion for about 3 minutes. It just wasn't for me.

 

8 players in a group just have much better odds of taking on a zerg compared to a 5-6man group. 8 people are like a little zerg of their own.

 

Why not 10?

Surely the extra 2 would help out!

(My actual point being this number in a vaccum is just an arbitrary number.  Great game design means the game system works well with the group number given, whatever that number is, or there is an innovative approach to grouping altogether.)

Well I can see that if your game supports a larger variety of types of healers, tanks, and support classes you can fill a larger group with that variety and maybe have more synergy between classes.

Let's build the ultimate MMO 1 feature at a time
http://www.mmorpg.com/discussion2.cfm/thread/398555/page/1

"blocked nariusseldon since forever"

  boxsnd

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/04/12
Posts: 449

 
OP  1/23/13 1:27:04 PM#24
Originally posted by Ramanadjinn
Originally posted by boxsnd
Originally posted by mmoguy43

Great thread! I love it when someone goes into detail of pros/cons of MMOs I didn't get a chance to play. I wonder how you'd figure in how Aion does PvP if you have played that too.

One thing I don't get is why do you say 8 player groups are always better compared to other games with 6. Is it simply easier to manage them compared to having an raid of 1 group +2?

I played aion for about 3 minutes. It just wasn't for me.

 

8 players in a group just have much better odds of taking on a zerg compared to a 5-6man group. 8 people are like a little zerg of their own.

 

Why not 10?

Surely the extra 2 would help out!

(My actual point being this number in a vaccum is just an arbitrary number.  Great game design means the game system works well with the group number given, whatever that number is, or there is an innovative approach to grouping altogether.)

Maybe 10 is too many. I don't know. All I know is that 8 just works extremely well.

DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  azzamasin

Hard Core Member

Joined: 6/06/12
Posts: 2840

We live in a fantasy world, a world of illusion. The great task in life is to find reality.

1/23/13 1:31:40 PM#25

Good post but I do disagree with you on 2 points:

 

  1. CC not being long enough
  2. Killing should be primary objective over keep taking.
 
CC was always the red herring in DAoC and even though it was fun for an 8 man gank group to kill a 40 man zerg, it should never be like that.  twice their numbers I can understand but again when you make killing the enemy the primary method you have things like that.  I do like the short duration CC effects that GW2 uses, it feels more natural and allows greater skill to come into play without the shitty feeling of losing control of your character for minutes at a time.  In a time before RR's in DAoC, Midguard had the best groups because of their Priests were also the best CC class i nthe game.  Getting mezzed for 2 minutes at a time was really disheartening.
 
CC short and Keep taking should be the primary method of aquiring RvR ranks. 

If your idea of a Sandbox is open FFA Full Loot PvP, full crafted world with minimal support for anything combat then your sandbox ideas are bad! Sandbox means open world, non-linear gaming PERIOD!

  cronius77

Apprentice Member

Joined: 4/26/12
Posts: 1313

1/23/13 1:33:16 PM#26
Originally posted by eric_w66

"First of we all know that this type of PvP started with DAoC, and (pre-ToA) DAoC is considered by most people as the best PvP game of all time."

Problem with this is it is a false premise. "Most" people don't consider DAOC to have been successful in PvP. One realm dominated the other two on most servers, they had to encourage people to move to lower pop sides servers with pre-leveled chars with gear, etc. That's not success.  That's patching failure.  The people who do consider DAOC to be the best PvP game of all time, look back on it with rose-tinted glasses and forget all the frustration the game gave them.

Best PvP game I've ever played was Tribes 1.0, prior to the rampant cheating/hacks.  Then, after that, Pong.

i played DAOC for over 4 years straight and took multiple characters well above realm rank 5 etc and can tell you on the three RP servers while you had the VN board whiners complaining about realm balance all the time , majority of the playerbase I played with loved being the lower realms because it was free realm points to no skill zerge mentalities and realm hoppers. Im not sure why your opinion is speaking for the majority of the players and us that enjoyed it had rose tinted glasses on as most people I know and that was MANY in DAOC never once bitched about the things you mentioned. The only real complaint came after TOA released and you had the power gamers ruining the pvp balance with the master levels and artifacts but once TOA allowed you to go to the rvr dungeon in new frontiers and level off player kills the gap disappeared.

  eric_w66

Apprentice Member

Joined: 1/12/06
Posts: 1009

1/23/13 1:36:45 PM#27

Indeed, long duration CC has gone the way of the Dodo for a reason. A simple reason. Money. People don't like losing control of their characters for long periods of time, and if CC allows for 8 to kill 40 (assuming equal level/skill), there's a serious problem with game design. Charms are practically never seen anymore for PvP, because people would take control of you, and walk you off a cliff. Yay. An I-Win button. Stuns that last longer than a few seconds, same thing. It's NO FUN to not be able to fight.

After all, the objective is Player vs Player *combat* not, Player Vs Statues "One sided slaughter".

  Phelcher

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/01/09
Posts: 1133

1/23/13 1:40:34 PM#28

DOAC had the best squirmish battles. Zergs and big battles were mostly on the weekend...

 

The phun was in the day to day incidental PvP...

 

 

"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


-Nariusseldon

  boxsnd

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/04/12
Posts: 449

 
OP  1/23/13 1:41:26 PM#29
Originally posted by azzamasin

Good post but I do disagree with you on 2 points:

 

  1. CC not being long enough
  2. Killing should be primary objective over keep taking.
 
CC was always the red herring in DAoC and even though it was fun for an 8 man gank group to kill a 40 man zerg, it should never be like that.  twice their numbers I can understand but again when you make killing the enemy the primary method you have things like that.  I do like the short duration CC effects that GW2 uses, it feels more natural and allows greater skill to come into play without the shitty feeling of losing control of your character for minutes at a time.  In a time before RR's in DAoC, Midguard had the best groups because of their Priests were also the best CC class i nthe game.  Getting mezzed for 2 minutes at a time was really disheartening.
 
CC short and Keep taking should be the primary method of aquiring RvR ranks. 

Let's agree to disagree about the CC. I find getting CCed a bunch of times (even if it's for a short time) much more frustrating/infuriating than getting CCed once for a longer time (as long as I know I will have my immunity when it ends).

 

But why keeps instead of kills? That would surely lead to keep trading and players making zergs and circling each other.

DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  Phelcher

Advanced Member

Joined: 6/01/09
Posts: 1133

1/23/13 1:43:36 PM#30
Originally posted by eric_w66

Indeed, long duration CC has gone the way of the Dodo for a reason. A simple reason. Money. People don't like losing control of their characters for long periods of time, and if CC allows for 8 to kill 40 (assuming equal level/skill), there's a serious problem with game design. Charms are practically never seen anymore for PvP, because people would take control of you, and walk you off a cliff. Yay. An I-Win button. Stuns that last longer than a few seconds, same thing. It's NO FUN to not be able to fight.

After all, the objective is Player vs Player *combat* not, Player Vs Statues "One sided slaughter".

 

Your opinion^ is because of a lack of understanding....  a 40 second CC always had a way out. There were all kinds of counters to remove it, if you so choosed to build your char that way.

 

It all comes down to how skill your group was and how in sync they are.

"No they are not charity. That is where the whales come in. (I play for free. Whales pays.) Devs get a business. That is how it works."


-Nariusseldon

  boxsnd

Advanced Member

Joined: 10/04/12
Posts: 449

 
OP  1/23/13 1:45:53 PM#31
Originally posted by eric_w66

 Charms are practically never seen anymore for PvP, because people would take control of you, and walk you off a cliff.

This is by far the most fun thing I have ever done in WoW. Mind control enemies and throw them in the lava in BRM. Back in the day when brm was the PvP hotspot.

DAoC - Excalibur & Camlann

  Lokero

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 4/30/06
Posts: 341

1/23/13 1:48:42 PM#32
Originally posted by boxsnd

 

6) Names of enemies visible, same enemies all the time (to build rivalries and realm pride, and to make the whole war feel important)

I just wanted to pull this point out.  I'm really curious, but doubtful this is going to happen the way players would hope.  If you guys recall, they have this "mega-server" thing going on where everyone is instances on one giant server.  I'm not sure how it's going to factor into PvP, but I'd guess "not well".

 

I seriously doubt any possibility of rivals and arch-enemies given the instancing design.  If there's 2 million players and you get tossed into instances like they say, it seems you might never see the same players again(unless they are on your friends list).

I don't know, maybe I haven't heard enough detail about how their system works, but it sounds like one giant, sloppy mess of 50 instances per zone/area.

  Mardukk

Spotlight Poster

Joined: 2/05/11
Posts: 1463

1/23/13 1:59:08 PM#33
Originally posted by ShakyMo
The problem with SOME wow cc is you can take damage while controlled.

I have no problem with say sheep. It's things like rogue stuns and fear that are the problem.

If all cc in wow broke on damage, it would have a good cc system where you used cc more tactically. E.g. you cc the healers at the back then attack all the dos now they have no support.

A lot of mmos make this mistake, then what you get is simple tactic of fire off a bunch if cc at the blob then aoe it to feck.

All cc breaking on damage is good because it forces pvpers to be careful about use of aoe, without really harming pve.

As a PvE'r I could get on board with this idea.  It wouldn't screw PvE (I hate 2 second fears/mez argh) and provide more tactical use of it in PvP.

 

Good list OP.

  jtcgs

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/28/04
Posts: 1843

1/23/13 2:02:32 PM#34

You are arguing open world PvP based on a game that did not have open world PvP...

DaoC was NOT open world. Asherons Call and Ultima Online was OPEN WORLD PvP.

It means you can PvP EVERYWHERE because you can go EVERYWHERE. And no, DaoC was not the best PvP game, I dont know of a single person that played on Darktide in Asherons Call that would say DaoC limited PvPing zones was the best, if anything the game handicapped PvPing by making it grouped based like PvE instances. The very idea of player skill went away and it became a group zerg fest where the side with the most people and best gear wins.

Long gone are the days of two people fighting for 20-30 minutes because they are SKILLED...we are left with 10 second long fights and gank fests.

Who knows, maybe Black Desert will do "DaoC" style zerg PvP the "right way"...outside the closed confines it was placed into and dumped into an actual OPEN WORLD...either way, you wont get it in TESO, they already anounced that the factions will be just like in DaoC, closed to other faction players, and PvP will have its set "zones".

“I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  Alders

Hard Core Member

Joined: 1/28/10
Posts: 1763

I cannot fiddle but I can make a great state of a small city.

1/23/13 2:08:06 PM#35

Long duration CC is and will always be terrible.  Controlling someone for 40 sec is not skill, I'm sorry.

Want to make 8 vs. 30's possible?  Design better maps and incentives that discourages zergs.  Running around in packs of 30-40 being the optimal strategy is just poor design.  This is GW2's biggest issue and makes WvW unsatisfying.

Keeps should fucking mean something more than an object to swap every 15min.  Force the majority of the players to defend them and let the smaller and more skilled groups handle the open field objectives and combat.

  Rthuth434

Novice Member

Joined: 12/26/12
Posts: 367

1/23/13 2:14:37 PM#36

all this shit talk about "discouraging" zergs...anything with large player counts will have zergs. it's the natural behavior of players to run in large packs. if it's possible, it'll happen. first of all DAoC, GW2 and likely TESO all have other means of success and other ways for players to get by. they all allow for mini zergs and solo feats to help in the fight(Presumably TESO will). the only game with a bad implementation of this kind of large scale pvp is TSW.

 

discourage what every god damn player who logs into your game is going to seek to do without fail and WILL DO???? right.

 

the above post describes Fusang more than WvWvW. the only things that get swapped on any such interval is supply camps, if there's lots of fighting. and they already allow for and reward defending the keeps. maybe you're in a shit grouping.

  alkarionlog

Hard Core Member

Joined: 3/19/09
Posts: 1078

1/23/13 2:19:03 PM#37
Originally posted by Alders

Long duration CC is and will always be terrible.  Controlling someone for 40 sec is not skill, I'm sorry.

Want to make 8 vs. 30's possible?  Design better maps and incentives that discourages zergs.  Running around in packs of 30-40 being the optimal strategy is just poor design.  This is GW2's biggest issue and makes WvW unsatisfying.

Keeps should fucking mean something more than an object to swap every 15min.  Force the majority of the players to defend them and let the smaller and more skilled groups handle the open field objectives and combat.

problem is saying zerging is poor design of devs is a mistake,  the problem is teh players because most of people will zerg for the sake of it, any organized group know they can cover a hell more ground if they divide and send several groups to several points, the zerg can win agasint the small group? they can but then you have only one zone problem and you zre winning overrall and having a place to fight in is better, I do see people complaining the W3 have no point and I never agree

 

for the OP you did some have some nice opnions but most of then I don't agree much, also I sure do recomend you just send then this via e-mail or post on they sugestion forum, here you are or asking to be flamed, want to know what most of people here want to know, but in the very end you will be sure no devs will read.

 

my opnion is they will amke a game will be so damn generic people will flame the damn thing to the ground also from what I know from bethesda devs teh game will crash every hour then after a year or 2 they will fix most bugs, but you will get a crash sometimes, so i'm not expecting much from it

FOR HONOR, FOR FREEDOM.... and for some money.

  ShakyMo

Apprentice Member

Joined: 11/21/11
Posts: 7246

1/23/13 2:29:17 PM#38
Jtcgs
You're wrong, I played on mordred. It had exactly the same pvp setup as darktide. What you are referring to is core servers, but daoc also had full pve and full pvp servers.
  jtcgs

Advanced Member

Joined: 9/28/04
Posts: 1843

1/23/13 2:31:11 PM#39
Originally posted by Rthuth434

all this shit talk about "discouraging" zergs...anything with large player counts will have zergs. it's the natural behavior of players to run in large packs. if it's possible, it'll happen.

 Except in those games it didnt. Amazingly enough, when you make classes with deep skillsets, people will PvP for the challenge, games with limited class structures place in things like "sieges" and PvP zones with objectives because they require a carrot on a stick to get people to do things and they force people into groups.

There was plenty of non-zerg PvP pre DaoC. Sure there was some, but its forced now.

“I hope we shall crush...in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country." ~Thomes Jefferson

  Nihilist

Apprentice Member

Joined: 3/08/04
Posts: 636

1/23/13 2:37:25 PM#40

Great overview of the history of faction based pvp.

 

I tend to disagee with long duration CCs and it was one of the big problems with DAOC. A single person being able to AOE mez people for 10+ seconds was ridiculous. Fights just came down to whoever landed their AOE CC first.

 

Zerging just needs to be accepted for these types of modes. Even in a skill based twitch game like Planetside, the zerg will usually win. I know people like to fantasize about being the 300 Spartans vs 20 000 persians, but that isn't likely to happen in any sort of game that is balanced, which is needed if it is to appeal to large numbers of people.

 

Zerging can be halted by forcing people to spread out to hold map objectives, and having very large maps like DAOC. This is one major issue in GW2 - maps are wall to small so there is no way a small group can take a keep before it is reinforced.

 

Another thing DAOC did great was having completely distinct factions. I know for budget and balance reasons we are not going to see realm specific pve and classes. Races, armor sets, architecture and anything else that won't effect balance should be unique to create that sense of realm pride. Planetside 2 has done a good job here.


 

8 Pages « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 » Last Search