City siege improvements are good apparently

I couldn't get on for the Euro PTS lark, but from everything I've read so far things are looking pretty damn good. "Like a huge Nordenwatch" was one of the descriptions I very much liked the sound of. Game performance in the cities is meant to be much improved too, which would be a very welcome change.

Other bloggers weren't as slack as I and managed to get on to the PTS. There ares some comments over at Overly Positive and Werit which as always with those blogs are worth a butchers, plus there's the feedback threads over at the official US forums.

If Mythic pull this off and makes city sieges fun, then this could make a big difference for a lot of people. There's a whole load of us that don't bother going to attacks or defence currently because it's just fairly poor PvE with hideous lag. If that was to change to decent RvR and good performance... Well my friends, I'll see you in the city :)

56.789% of MMO facts are bollocks

All the time I see forum warriors pulling statistics and “facts” out of their arse.

WAR has sold 2 million pre-orders in the Far East!

By my accurate estimate WAR subs are now at 123K

WAR subs are growing 33% every month!!

WAR is in maintenance mode and will be dead within a month!

It’s probably a load of old cock. In reality the facts and statistics, both for and against, are nothing more than rumour and guesswork based upon individual’s perception. Perception that is tainted by their personal experience of WAR, their past MMO preferences and the ranting of people on the forum they have alt-tabbed at work. Unless it has a linked source from EA or Mythic, take any fact or statistic as pure opinion.

People are now giving their “accurate” estimates based on EA’s latest report where apparently the only thing mentioned about WAR was that it was mostly responsible for a 33% increase in their $36million online subscription income. Despite the vagueness, folks are using that percentage to calculate subscription numbers for WAR. Regardless of there being no detail on what was included within in those subs, how the other games subs reduced or increased and so on. By Odin’s beard! People are even using xfire stats as proof… Maybe we have no bloody idea and should accept until EA/Mythic confirm it; we’re just pulling numbers out of our arse to support the argument we want to make.

Both the haters and lovers lash out at each other, forums are trolled to death and finding anything meaningful becomes bloody impossible. Human nature validates our opinions and makes all different ones wrong. We’re right and anyone thinking differently is a noob retard bastard that’s probably 12 years old or a sweaty geek that’s never seen a real woman naked. Let the circle of hate and anger commence! RAAAGHHH! HATE! ANGER! HATE! ANGER! HATE! ANGER!

My perception of WAR is positive. It has problems, it would be naïve to suggest otherwise, but for me it has more good points. It’s still the MMO I see myself playing long term. Based upon my experience of past MMOs I think the idea that the game is going to be turned off is ridiculous. So am I right? Pffft… no idea! What I do know is that my guild is good, very active and committed to WAR, most times that I log in my server has a high/high population and there’s always loads of fighting to be done. However not everyone has those things (and even if they do), their “state of the game” may differ immensely.

I think the latest hype-fest Aion is bloody awful. It runs very well, but it’s too grind based, I loathe the slightly suspect, camp fairy imagery and I believe once it goes live in the west it’s popularity with many western gamers will fizzle out fairly quickly. Archlord, Lineage, RF Online, zzzzzzz, I’ve seen it all before. Now I could go into the many reasons why I feel this about Aion, but I can’t present them as fact; it’s nothing more than my own opinion. Likewise the people I know that liked the Lineage games or Final Fantasy online thingy are pimping Aion like they’ve got Gianna Michaels for a freebie weekend rampage, but that’s just down to their preference and opinion. They predict we will see a new king, a World of Aion if you like, but that's a prediction, not a fact.

It’s very easy for us to make judgements on how the majority view an MMO based on the thoughts of our own gaming communities and the forums and/or blogs we read, but its a monstrously arrogant assumption to believe we represent the majority of MMO gamers, or that it turns us into to some kind of gaming expert with mutant industrial espionage powers.

The reason we’re playing and talking up the MMOs we do is down to our personal perception of that game. I just wish people would be more wary of estimating facts and presenting opinion as anything other than what it is.

One man’s truth is another man’s utter bollocks.

IMHO ;)

WCPI - Leaked patch notes 1.3.1

Shadow-war has a decent write up and details of the leaked patch notes for 1.3.1 that briefly appeared on the EU forums. If you want a heads up on what 1.3.1 is probably bringing us, that's a good place to fill your boots. Leaked patch notes should always be considered far from gospel, but these ones look pretty solid.

Bug fixes galore and what appear to be excellent changes to the city siege system. Lets hope.

WAAAGH!

Durtbocks has been at it again...

Rickrolling is so last year. Waaagh!rolling is where its at.

Give me some of that scenario action

A good while back I called for the removal of scenarios from WAR, they were detracting from oRvR and to me felt like they were only put in to catch gamers that needed some World of Warcraft familiarity.

Ok, so this is me eating my words. :P I’ve actually been enjoying scenarios immensely over the last few months. I think this is down to several factors.

1) I almost exclusively play in guild groups.
I can’t stress how much better scenarios are if you play with guild groups. If you end up stuck with a bunch of clueless buggers with Internet Twat Bully Syndrome™, well… at least there are 6 of you in there that can try and make a difference. Hell, if you’re lucky with your timed sign ups then you can get a couple of guild groups in at once, which makes for a much more satisfying experience (possibly not for your enemy muhahaha).
Also, just like skirmish oRvR, when you are in a scenario communication and reliability are key. A good bunch of mates and a ventrilo server can make all the difference. Win or lose, it’s more fun when you can have a coordinated attempt at victory.

2) Its not just Serpents bloody Passage anymore.
Variety is the spice of life. Previously when I did a lot of scenarios it was back when all you got was Serpents Passage. Thankfully those days have gone and we get a decent mix of scenarios to fight in.

3) WAR’s scenarios are mostly rather good.
There’s a lot of scenarios in WAR I like; Logrin’s Forge, Battle for Praag, Maw of Madness, Grovod Caverns and Gromril’s Crossing to name just a few. Most of WAR’s scenarios are variants on capture the flag or king of the hill, but they’re nicely mixed up and well made.

4) No Zerg.
Zergs aren’t my cup of tea. I’ll follow them about for ease now and again, but I much prefer more of the small skirmish type fights. Big fights can be fun for sure, particularly when the sides are fairly even. A 4 warband pile up entertaining, but unfortunately all too often its big zerg vs small zerg. With zone layout and the zone locking campaign promoting the zerg, it’s important to have alternatives.


Of course scenarios can also be unbalanced and they are very good at putting emphasis on the overpowered elements in an MMO. I imagine every WAR player, both Order and Destruction, has experienced the pain of facing multiple professional bomb groups. *shudders* I suppose the more you reduce the size of a fight; the more you highlight the abilities of the individuals in it. That said, I think often people forget that this is not just highlighting advantages of different classes, but also the skill of the player.

The only thing I personally find frustrating with scenarios is when people leave early. Short of a RL emergency I never quit scenarios and I encourage my guild members not to either, it’s just not the Kill Frenzy way. It’s all about the waaagh man… That does however mean we sometimes get stuck in impossible situations. A night or two ago I was in a guild group doing Battle for Praag. On joining we quickly realised the other Destruction were randoms and we were facing at least 2 premades of decent Order. After one wipe the other Destruction just buggered off. Leaving us all alone... More destro queueing solo would join, see the score and then leave as well. We of course stayed to the end and tried to put a fight up, but when there are 6 of you taking on 18 coordinated enemies camping your spawn, well… that’s only going to go one way. :P
That’s not so much WAR’s fault as it is many players lacking any sense of honour and only playing for the renown gain. People can say what’s the point of fighting in an obvious loss, but then if everyone had that attitude and simply quit at the first sign of a loss, then there wouldn’t be any PvP at all. If you can’t cope with losing now and again, go PvE. Plus there’s nothing like turning a losing scenario around for a win, which I guess some folks will just never experience.

Is it possible to add a third faction?

Is it too late? Probably. Would it be a bad time to try? Probably :P It would require huge redevelopment and of course would turn everything on its head. But lets live in dreamland for a moment, if Mythic were to try and add another faction are there actually any real options?

I reckon with a shit load of work, time and effort it could be done. So on to the big question....

How to adapt the campaign for a third faction?

The existing system could still work, but have a third VP scoreline and a third branch of zones from each central zone (Praag for example).

First off lets quickly make up a faction. I'm going to go with one called Nature with Lizardmen, Wood Elves and Bretonnians. Now lets attach Wood Elf zones to Praag.

If a faction locks the central zone, then both of the other factions zones become attackable and remain so until the central zone is contested again.

If either of those zones then lock (to which ever enemy faction), the fortress is then attackable.

Taking it further and sticking with one city each (boo hiss), if your faction takes 2 forts from another faction you then get to attack their city.

But what if the attack on Nature's fortress failed, Order locked Reikland and then pushed on Praag whilst Destruction was attacking Loren Forests? Uh oh! Destruction's attack has been cut off and now they face a difficult choice.

Continue their attack on Nature's fortress or risk Order locking Praag and pushing into the Chaos Wastes.

Oh my, what's this? A far less linear and more dynamic campaign? Actual options to cut off supply lines and isolate the enemy? Well, I think so anyway...

Riddled with flaws? Probably, but then maybe something like this could be fitted into WAR. Dark Age of Camelot showed us how well 3 factions works, it prevents one side dominating and keeping the campaign fresh and exciting. Those of us that played DAoC have struggled to understand why Mythic didn't do the same again here.

When Mythic starts looking at major expansions, perhaps they should start reconsidering that missing faction.

OMG! Magus protest and suicide pact!

Fair play Uroo mate, you did it :)

Watch more videos of Warhammer Online

This video was made by Caz from VOP, well done to you sir, great choice of song. It will be interesting to see what if any response this gets from Mythic. I really hope so, cos the shite state of Magus desperately needs acknowledgement from Mythic.

Classic event /salute to all involved.