Bored Druid ThreadFollow

Well, assuming it's a Warhammer esque type scenario, it means that the bulk of content is generated from a PVP perspective.

So, look at WoW, where the primary content development is in PVE. Dungeons, Raids, and other PVE experiences easily receive most of the attention, with BGs and Arena being more of a side endeavor. They're constantly running balance corrections, of course, but you rarely see new content or new importance lent to the system.

In ESO, there are... 3?... factions, iirc. And the top ranking player in the world gets to play as Emperor or something, with some limited power associated with the job. And it seems like that factional aspect is going to be a big part of everything.

I'm sure there will BE PVE content. I know they've discussed dungeons. It just seems like the game is trying to champion the PVP side of things. And, IIRC, dungeons are sort of "public" instances (no clue how that works), but I feel like I remember them mentioning you could run into other players in your dungeon. So that could have a PVP aspect too?

GW2 is another PVP-focused game. There ARE plenty of PVE activities, but the real endgame is the PVP stuff.

Well, usually people will listen.

That's why I don't think the system could work unless people's rewards were contingent on obeying their leader.

As in, if your leader orders your group to defend a node, then only kills within the area of that node will give you honor. If your leader puts a kill order on the healer, then you have 5 seconds to kill your current target before it becomes honorless (contingent on the death of said healer).

And have something like an adherence statistic, where they get x% of the win/loss reward according to their adherence to the party objectives/commands.

I think we've reached the point technologically where there's no good reason we can't have these systems.

I do think, though, that we'd need some intensive attention paid to making these systems easy to communicate. Things like clear, large orders being placed on maps/minimaps. If your leader tells you to defend a node, make the border of that node's area clear. Etc.

Once upon a time, that would have been a pretty huge hurdle, technologically. It just isn't anymore. There's no good reason we can't implement these systems.

Right now, the biggest hurdle in controlling a raid group is communication. Without vent, it's extremely hard. And even with vent, with so many voices (and people focused on their tasks), it can be hard to communicate your orders.

Fortunately, when we're talking about something so broad as a battlefield tactical map, that doesn't need to be the case. Yeah, maybe you'll have just as much trouble as ever getting people to use their interrupts. But you can still take direct control of their rewards, and be aware that the system is going to do everything it can to communicate those orders.

Again, I'm not convinced this would work by any means. I just think there's a chance it could work, and be awesome.

Mass PvP in Warhammer: Age of Reckoning is probably the best implemented mass PvP I've experienced. Sure, it lagged a bit, but no matter what level or "class" I was, I felt like I was part of the battle.

Wish someone would make another Warhammer MMO. I love the universe.

That makes the fun for 4/5 people dependent on the whims of a stranger, a stranger who may be great at PvP but a worthless leader or who may have bought his high rating or who sticks to the safest, most boring strategy possible.

No thanks.

I''d buy you a beer but shipping to Denmark isn't cheap :(

I think that what you're saying will either get you at the mercy of whoever is leading or if you're allowed to leave people will end up leaving as soon as the team isn't winning.

I just don't think you can force a large group of random people to cooperate in a way that's still enjoyable for everyone involved.

If you want mass PvP to work at all you need to have people organize it in a similar way as raids. (real raids, not PuG raids)

Well, large-scale warfare is broken down to smaller and smaller groups. Something along the lines of one person tells three people, who in turn tells three people, et cetera et cetera.

Thinking the best way to make it work would be to make the next objective very obvious. For example, the next natural thing to do is to take the bridge so you can get to the enemy fort, so people who are fighting around the bridge get bonus points. The other thing that comes to mind would be to have the game be the general in charge and direct all the traffic. You get you command from the computer NPC, and get the bonus honor/xp/whatever for following what it says.

Again though, I'm a bit afraid anything that doesn't have a very defined objective and narrow means to get there will just be inviting chaos. In the end, there's still going to be a subset of the population that just leaves battleground chat and does whatever the heck they'd like.

I'm one of the best geared on the server. If we win this, people will get geared up faster and I lose my advantage. My best option is to lose on purpose.

I've found laser pointers work wonders when trying to herd cats.

Well obviously the solution is to give the battleground leader a virtual laser pointer then.

Edited, Jun 14th 2013 10:55am by someproteinguy

My former guild in WoW had a raid team named Herding Cats. They actually did pretty well for themselves, but I always found the name amusing.

I know Maz has said it's legal in Denmark.