Monday 19 October 2009

Producers letter, info and stuff

Well my friends not only is the 1.3.2 patch out, but now we also have the Producer's news letter to go with it.
Lets see what's interesting in it then...

It mentions the new features like the IMHO excellent new user experience and the apprentice system, which I've not really seen much from yet, so wont comment.
Then it all goes a bit Pete Tong....
•Fortresses no longer gate ownership over a pairing. LET THE INCREASED CITY SIEGING BEGIN! Don’t worry if it’s your capital city under siege—rewards await you and your Realm for putting up a good fight.

Sweet mother of Tzeentch! A celebration of the worst thing this patch brings us! Delusional :P We wanted fortresses FIXED, or REPLACED with you know, something good... not bloody REMOVED! Ahh misery our campaign has been turned into a bloody deathmatch! To quote a friend just now, "there is now something worse than Epic Fail.. MYTHIC FAIL!" lol people sssssssure aint happy :P

Anyways, onwards...

I do have to agree , I'm delighted with the game performance improvements. GJ Mythic.

And the real highlights are clues for 1.3.3:

1) Server response time optimization (From mounting/dismounting to abilities to moving things in your inventory, all response time has been improved.)

2) Ability to walk and sit. (RP players rejoice!)
Pardon? Is this seriously in here? Surely this is just flame bait? I bet the guys on the European RP server are over the moon... oh wait..

3) Various UI fixes, such as making sure timers synchronize properly on PQs.

4) Graphical enhancements (Bloom, improved weapon trails, heat shimmer, etc…).

5) Pet and monster pathing improvements.
Good! Oh wait my pets don't move anyway. Damn :P
Where are the new forts?
“What is this Underdog System all about?” Basically, it’s a system that kicks in on any server to help aid the Realm that’s consecutively being pummeled. It’s a handicap system, so to speak, for the T4 campaign. VPs needed for zone control and domination timers will lessen for the losing side. What’s nice about this system is that it ramps up and down on the fly, thus opening up opportunities for the losing Realm to get back on its feet. In my next letter I’ll go over this in more detail.
Hmmm... Could be good, could be bad, who knows? Wait and see for more info.


  1. The underdog system they are talking about, is something I thought they would implement for Lotd control. God knows how long ago I proposed that idea.

    I had been hoping for something more substantial than that for Underdog system. I don't think that's going to get them many brownies.

  2. Coming from Burlok, that server that housed the roleplaying weirdo's and geeks, I don't see any flamebait. I'm actually very happy about the extra immersion it will provide.

    Oh yea, I'll walk... actually as a magus I'll float, but I'll damn well float calmly !

  3. The Underdog system that has been discussed on the core tester forums - but was quickly shot down and pulled from 1.3.2 (before PTS was opened) was this:

    The more times one side opened the enemy city in a given period of time (I think it was something like 3 days) without their city being opened the enemy side would get a scaling hit point bonus.

    This proposal immdately turned into the biggest thread on the core tester forums (none of the posts supportive) and the idea was dropped. Personally I think they could have done better but I think something (even something as bad as this) should have been included in 1.3.2 to help balance things better.

  4. The Underdog system is a really hard problem. You can't punish the winners but at the same time you need to address the basic powerless-ness of the losers. Victory point scaling will not help if you are constantly outnumbered.

  5. Wow that system is... uhm... papering over the cracks somewhat.

    I can almost hear the forums exploding at that concept already.

  6. @Aelith: are you sure you are supposed to give out this information?

    Anyway, their underdog system really isn't good enough, I have never ever seen anyone worrying about VP. As Skar said it would suit LotD better - but even then it's better to use "no warcamp = no respawn" system there in my opinion.

    If what Aelith proposed is true, I think it's one way to do it, but I'd prefer the "cooldown" idea first and foremost. What I meant is they really should impose a shorter time limit/longer cooldown for a city under constant assault, to give a chance for the other realm to attack the other city.
    It doesn't completely solve the problem of "too many city instances" but it should allow a chance for the other realm to attack a city too.

    The power scaling has been done by WoW as far as I know, I don't know why people are up in arms about it. As long as they are limited to unbalanced instances it should be alright. that I think about it, a pairing-wide daemonball-like mechanic for relics might be what they have in mind afterall.

  7. Long time reader, first time poster.
    From what I still assume, WAR is fixable!
    It's the greatest PvP game on the market, in this humble poster's opinion. Bootae is the only one still advocating, yet slowly being disparate to his need to advocate. And for that I must say he kicks arse! Even following what can only be described as quitting, my other fav blog's have issued statements that WAR doesn't work...ahh in Bootae's vernacular "Bollocks" in mine "that's BS" Just because others have left does that mean Bootae's is all that's his is that's left that is honest about a player who truly cares, and god's knows we need more of that!

  8. I like this commentator, clearly a man of taste and wisdom ;)

    Yeah, the number of WAR blogs is dwindling fast, not many of us left alas. :(

    Still trying to stay posting positively and fairly, but of late that's been made difficult for sure. The game continues to have potential though, despite what those forum hives of negativity may be saying :P

  9. @ Tim

    I think it's one of those things that a few people will be very pleased about, but you just know a lot of people will be asking why they fix that and not A, B or C.

    Probably one of those different team things tbh.

  10. I think that there has to be a system response to one side constantly sieging the other. If the core testers don't like the extended periods between seiges (Which I like), then maybe we can look at upgrading the quality/numbers of the guards that the keeps have.

    I would sweeten the deal, but rating the keeps level to 2/3 in the difficulty system. So that the baseline rewards would be higher from the outset.

    If the order keep was level 3 out of the gate, because destrcution had basically been camped out in the Altdorf parking lot, then it's got to be bloody tough to take.


About Me

My photo
Half man half pixel. Music obsessive, likes a drink, occasional bastard.