Curse

HawkofStorms · Dec 04, 2008, 07:45 PM // 19:45

Warhammer is just having a drop in server population because PEOPLE'S 30 DAY TRIAL HAS ENDED. Everyone who bought the game right when it came out just haven't bothered renewing yet.

It has nothing to do with content (trust me, there's PLENTY of that), but everything to do with the fact that you can't compare a game with non-monthly fees to one with monthly fees. And you can't compare any game to WoW because its had years to build up a fan base.
Warhammer, although having less players now then when it was first released, is far from a failure. It still has plenty of potential to draw back old players if it fixes a few class balance issues, deals with lag, release new professions with the next big patch, and most importantly merges servers so there are more people (PLEASE). It is still to early to pass final judgement on that.

And I agree that anybody going "OMG GW is dead" is a moron when you look at just how many people are playing this game.

wetsparks · Dec 04, 2008, 09:19 PM // 21:19

I can't get why people scream in this thread and the million similar ones that high level means lots of grind. Do normal offline rpgs have lots of grind just because the level cap is 99? No because the games aren't meant to keeping you paying a monthly fee. That is what Guild Wars is, a normal RPG except that you have to play it online. Guild Wars 2 will take elements of normal MMOs but it won't become one because they aren't trying to milk you of every monthly payment they can. What I think it will be more like is say Oblivion or Fallout 3 taken completely online. Huge open world, lots of quests to do, lots of people running around but it doesn't take you 3-4 hours of slow tedious combat to gain one level in the newbie area.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cellardweller

The population of [Warhammer Online] is dwindling fast and not because of kinks, but simply because the game play isn't very good.

You know, it's funny. I said something very similar, and I don't remember if it was on this forum or another, and got ripped to shreds and now you say it and it gets ignored.

Abedeus · Dec 04, 2008, 09:27 PM // 21:27

Quote:

You know, it's funny. I said something very similar, and I don't remember if it was on this forum or another, and got ripped to shreds and now you say it and it gets ignored.

Because there aren't many, if at all, WAR fanboys here. Just some people don't see that:

1. WAR's pve is more limited than GW.
2. PvP is as of this day only scenarios and ORvR if you are really lucky to be on a high popularity server.
3. ORvR is usually:

One side attacks, takes the keep. The other side waits till the people stop defending, takes over the keep. The other side leaves, then attacks when nobody's home. Why? Because people waste time defending the keep. They don't get anything for 30-60 minutes.
4. Melee, except for Stealth and Marauders, is really gimped, as RDPS just cakewalk over them.
5. Healers are already hard to play, yet Mythic gives less and less rewards for playing them... Lowered renown hurts the most.

notskorn · Dec 04, 2008, 10:00 PM // 22:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by HawkofStorms

Warhammer is just having a drop in server population because PEOPLE'S 30 DAY TRIAL HAS ENDED. Everyone who bought the game right when it came out just haven't bothered renewing yet.

People aren't renewing because the game is boring as hell, not because they "forgot" or "haven't bothered". You say there's a lot of content but all the complaints I've read say the game gets really grindish in the mid twenties or something. Its not too early to judge, WAR sucks bad.

HawkofStorms · Dec 04, 2008, 11:01 PM // 23:01

I disagree notskorn. I find the game a lot of fun, as do apparently a large number of people who still play it. It definately has more content then GW. The only people complaining about "lack of content" are the people who are trying to compare it to WoW (which is really unfair considering how much time WoW has had to add new content to it's game since launch).

The same people who post and whine about how WAR sucks are the same people who post and complain about how GW sucks. It has nothing to do with the game and everything to do with learning to ignore the opinions of people who post on game forums, who are usually a masocistic minority of the community who spend their time complaining on a forum. People who enjoy the game spend more time playing it.

WAR could be a big hit if enough people keep joining the game over the next few months and they condense the severs down. It does have problems. ORvR is a joke and there needs to be rewards for defending keeps/more of a point in zone ownership. None of these problems are "gamebreaking" and can fixed.

Really, I just think its still to early to judge WAR either way. Its not a success, but its far from a complete failure... yet. At least wait enough time for the casual gamer to reach tier 4 before complaining.

Bryant Again · Dec 05, 2008, 01:14 AM // 01:14

Indeed, there is a whole lot to enjoy in WAR. Classes are fun (gogo Marauder), open RvR is pretty sweet, scenarios are interesting, mods are growing, and all centered around action points.

They really need to focus on fixing the keep crashes (all that effort for it to go boom? no thanks), performance issues, and class balance concerns. After that it's a pretty solid game.

Lady Lozza · Dec 05, 2008, 01:22 AM // 01:22

Hmm, tbh I'd prefer a "no level" system rather than an "infinite level, power capped" system.

What, some of you might say, no attribute points or heath/mana increases. Quest for it. As long as a PvP character system exists like it does now with PvP only characters with maxed attributes, then I see no reason to bother with levels at all.

An "infinite level, power capped" system would encourage elitism. Yes e-peen means nothing, but it does make the game unfriendly at times.

Leave e-peen for the titles that are a choice to chase rather than an infinte grind to show xp and get in a group to do x-mission which possible from lvl20 but no one would accept anything less than a lvl100.

Crispie · Dec 06, 2008, 12:29 AM // 00:29

I'm more afraid that ridiculously high levels result in a new level of elitism for players.

Master Knightfall · Dec 06, 2008, 01:07 AM // 01:07

Elitism isn't necessarily related to high levels. Just goto Ascalons PVP arena sometimes and take a gander at level 8's or 9's in there with their Droknar's armor and a handful of elites from around that area in the snow Mineral Falls I think it were. Most elitism is formed at a certain point in the game where a major portion of the population has crossed over and from that point on these are the ones that dictate the prices and the builds and the rules of engagement and the team builds etc. etc. in most all mmo's. Doesn't have to be maximum level for elitism to begin though.
When GW was new it was a great game. Just about anyone would group with everyone, people were happy just to get to play in a group. Now all you read is PUGS suk this and PUGS suk that and PUGS suk in general. All these now elitists that used to be those ignorant pug players don't want to help or allow anyone new coming into the game to grow as they did, leeching off of others as they did, trying to learn the game like they did when they were idiots. See, that's how elitism works.

wetsparks · Dec 06, 2008, 04:59 AM // 04:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

Elitism isn't necessarily related to high levels. Just goto Ascalons PVP arena sometimes and take a gander at level 8's or 9's in there with their Droknar's armor and a handful of elites from around that area in the snow Mineral Falls I think it were. Most elitism is formed at a certain point in the game where a major portion of the population has crossed over and from that point on these are the ones that dictate the prices and the builds and the rules of engagement and the team builds etc. etc. in most all mmo's. Doesn't have to be maximum level for elitism to begin though.
When GW was new it was a great game. Just about anyone would group with everyone, people were happy just to get to play in a group. Now all you read is PUGS suk this and PUGS suk that and PUGS suk in general. All these now elitists that used to be those ignorant pug players don't want to help or allow anyone new coming into the game to grow as they did, leeching off of others as they did, trying to learn the game like they did when they were idiots. See, that's how elitism works.

After reading that I'm at a loss for words, and not in a good way.

Abedeus · Dec 06, 2008, 06:08 AM // 06:08

Actually, I dislike WAR because of following stuff:

1. I play on US server, but now I'm glad because GoA fails.
2. There is no ORvR on my server, at least up to 18th there was nothing.
3. Scenarios are boring, more boring than RA/TA.
4. ...And they are usually as chaotic/luck dependant as AB's.
5. They promised buffs. Cool, my level 21 eng after 1.05 is the weakest class. At least we had lame Magnet, now we have got NOTHING to make people take us.
6. Horrible performance.

maraxusofk · Dec 06, 2008, 08:05 AM // 08:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by wetsparks

After reading that I'm at a loss for words, and not in a good way.

regardless of the reasoning though, gw was alot better in the beginning.

street peddler · Dec 06, 2008, 08:32 PM // 20:32

cap skill gain at level 20. the level cap itself will be unlimited, probably just to serve as a title. or promote rank discrimination.

EagleDelta1 · Dec 06, 2008, 10:51 PM // 22:51

First off, can ppl stop trying to separate Levels from character growth? Please?
If you don't want levels to give you more skills, attribute point, etc - then what's the point?

Second, I want to address some concerns/complaints I've seen from other posters:

1. Grind: GW is an RPG, ALL RPGs, be they JRPGs or American RPGS, have some sort of grind. GW2 will be a RPG, so it WILL have grind. You have to EARN your skills some way. If you want everything available to within the first few days of playing, then go play an online game that is NOT an MMO.

2. Elitism: Okay, this confuses me. Games, by definition, are competitive, and competitiveness breeds elitism, END OF STORY. You don't want any elitism, then don't play games! There will always be ppl who are better, more experienced players than others.

Now, with those out of the story - I'm going to give an idea I have about the level system. I WANT to hear some feedback, too. Anyway, here goes:

I don't see a problem with an high/unlimited level cap. How bout we have it work in a similar way to SP RPGs that are usually found on consoles. The Level cap is high, but NEVER required to get all the REGULAR in-game and all PvP content, but Elite/Special content that are more appealing to the hardcore will require significantly higher levels to access/complete. These would offer the rewards such as high-end armor, uniques, etc.

Next, how bout Anet add in an Attribute system like 99% of ALL other RPGs (both MMO and SP) in that every character has a set of base Attributes they all share: Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Endurance, etc - you get the idea. When you create your character, then you're given somewhere between 10-20 points to put into those attributes, but after that they grow a little bit per level based on your profession, to keep, say, an ele from becoming an uber warrior-mage type character. Also, the attributes would have starting values that would highly separate the profs, and done in a way so that when you put your attribute points in at the beginning you can't "make" your toon uber powerful at the beginning.

Now, this "new" attribute system would NOT replace the old, but add to it. Each profession would still have those points that they put into their character at each level to improve the effectiveness of the skills related to said, let's call em "perks" instead of attributes. Now, keep in mind that the Attributes that you modify at character creation CANNOT be changed after that & increase automatically based on primary and secondary prof. so you would NOT have to try and manage both.

Finally, make the changes at each level small enough that players up to 5-7 levels apart can still play together and have fun. One game that has done this fairly well is FFXI (though the grind w/ that particular MMO is too much for me) in that ppl up to 5 levels away can play together and still get the benefits of a party at the same level.

So far, everything I've talked about would affect ONLY PvE characters. I suggest that PvP remain similar to it is now and that PvP characters start at a "maxed" out setting & PvE characters that do PvP are limited to specific stat limitations that provide as much equal ground as possible. That's the best PvP solution I can come up with, though in my experience competitive games - from sports to video games - rarely have ppl on equal ground as you always have someone w/ more experience or natural skill or something else that gives thema n advantage over the other person/team.

But that's all I've got, feel free to tear apart or add to my suggestions, but PLEASE, keep it clean.

MarlinBackna · Dec 07, 2008, 12:04 AM // 00:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by EagleDelta1

Next, how bout Anet add in an Attribute system like 99% of ALL other RPGs (both MMO and SP) in that every character has a set of base Attributes they all share: Strength, Intelligence, Wisdom, Endurance, etc - you get the idea.

I don't really see a point to it. Guild Wars attribute system is simple, effective, easy to change, and uncluttered. While it makes sense to me why you are suggesting cross-profession "perks", it is another level of complexity that just adds to the elitism/grind (all elementalists need max intelligence, all warriors need max strength etc.) that already plagues all of these RPGs including GW to some extent, and if you "screw up" your character creation (spec inappropriately), you have to reroll to be competitive.

@OP: I want there to be no level cap. BUT, I want there to be a "power level" system with a cap at 20-30. In GW1, at every level you get more health and more attribute points. What I am suggesting is that there be more levels in between each of these steps in health/stats. For example, levels 1-5 would be under power level 1, levels 6-10 power level 2, and so on. At each of the normal levels, you maybe get a skill or reputation points (depending where you are) or money or access to a new area. At each of the power levels, you get to increase your health and attributes. Now lets say 5 levels for each power level, making the max power level occur at level 100. Any level after 100 is then pure vanity, so then the super-nice armors (like Obsidian) and elite PvE areas would be available to those who have gone past that. Level 100's would be regarded as level 20's currently in GW1, as all would have the same stats (200 att points, 500 base health, etc.)

The reason for suggesting this is simply make the GW level system slightly better. I started a new character recently, and got him to level 20 easily in 8 hours. While it is nice not to have to worry about leveling in GW, it really takes the fun out of creating the character to have him at max level so quickly. I would make the time it takes to reach level 100 in GW2 at least 30 hours, if not 50. But that really depends on the amount of content after max level, which I hope is the biggest thing ANet delivers on (elite PvE content).

KoleAurow 23 · Dec 07, 2008, 12:29 AM // 00:29

I have a question for all of those who want unlimited cap: Just straight up why?

Is it because you like to grind?
Is it because you want to look good at higher levels?
Is it because you want to continue to get better however long you play?

I personally dont mind unlimited cap under ONE condition: After a certain point, levels dont mean squat. All they become is numbers, you dont gain anything...But it shows that you are willing to go above and beyond because you enjoy playing that character so much.

Heres why I dont think you should continue to gain power...
ANET IS GOING TO USE WORLD PVP. Now hear me out. Lets say they let a lvl 106 fight a lvl 28 that just roams around. ouchy...lol That would be BS and you all know it. You would have lvl 100's running around in lvl 30 places just to piss off ppl trying to lvl or have fun.
And secondly, what if ANET says in world PvP "If you are 10 levels apart, you cant fight." Well then now your fav character who you are just casually playing on is now a very high level and "Oh shit, I cant find anyone to fight when i want to mess around in the world PvP system because there are too many people of a low level. Damn."

BUT if you have a level where gaining any more levels doesnt matter, you can look prestigous and have more freedom in the PvE world PvP system in GW2...

comments on this please? lol

I think thats the best i can say it...

Sword Hammer Axe · Dec 07, 2008, 12:31 AM // 00:31

I like not having to be so focused on level. I would go for max 50 as well.

EagleDelta1 · Dec 07, 2008, 12:39 AM // 00:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by KoleAurow 23

Heres why I dont think you should continue to gain power...
ANET IS GOING TO USE WORLD PVP. Now hear me out. Lets say they let a lvl 106 fight a lvl 28 that just roams around. ouchy...lol That would be BS and you all know it. You would have lvl 100's running around in lvl 30 places just to piss off ppl trying to lvl or have fun.
And secondly, what if ANET says in world PvP "If you are 10 levels apart, you cant fight." Well then now your fav character who you are just casually playing on is now a very high level and "Oh shit, I cant find anyone to fight when i want to mess around in the world PvP system because there are too many people of a low level. Damn."

BUT if you have a level where gaining any more levels doesnt matter, you can look prestigous and have more freedom in the PvE world PvP system in GW2...

comments on this please? lol

I think thats the best i can say it...

I understand your concern with World PvP, but if ANet takes the right measures, then it won't matter. A good example of a game that's handled it very well is EVE, there are several measures in place that prevent/reduce any gain you have for attacking "weaker"/newer players. I.E. Uber powerful NPC chars fly around enforcing rules in certain areas, such at aggression w/out the rights results in the attacking player getting destroyed by the NPC "police". Does the victim still die and possibly lose equipment - yes, but so does the attacker.

In addition, many MMOs have areas that are progressively more difficult requiring Higher level/skill characters to be in and as such those are the types of players you'll find there.

RedNova88 · Dec 07, 2008, 01:05 AM // 01:05

Frankly I don't care what the level cap is. I care about the speed of progress, remember the level cap could be as low as 20 or even 10 but the experience required could be insane like in some MMOs. Or it could be 100 or more, but you could gain levels at a very fast speed. I do hope it stays at about where Prophecies was, quests give GOOD experience but not enough to fill more than half your bar, unless it's a very important quest or enemy you just killed.

If they raised the level cap I would not mind, as a level cap helps people set goals and really feel as if they are growing in the game, but when it takes a long time to get there it punishes people after a while, so this is something that you cannot simply toss together in a game.

For some reason level 30 comes to mind as a comfortable level cap. But no matter how high the cap is, as long as there are plentiful and interesting quests to do, I'm sure nobody will care what the cap is.

mlandry · Dec 07, 2008, 01:37 AM // 01:37

90 or 100... it gets annoying having no character progression and it kills the atmosphere for me. Characters should be getting stronger as they go.