Friday, February 08, 2008
Looking at WAR from the outside
I reported it earlier, but Bildo went through the hassle of getting an official confirmation: EA Mythic keeps an eye on bloggers, considers them to be "press", and officially excludes them from joining the WAR beta. I knew I should have worn a wig and false mustache when writing my WAR beta application! Or more realistically not used the e-mail address that is posted on my blog. :) At least I now have a fun answer to Cameron's desperate cry of why other bloggers are in the WAR beta and he isn't: Congratulations, pal, you are so famous that you made it on EA Mythic's black list. So am I. :)
The one advantage of *not* being in the WAR beta is that we aren't under any NDA. We can look in from the outside, looking at the newsletters and video podcasts, and comment freely. So that is what I'll do.
With the January newsletter EA Mythic released a WAR PvP video, which got two main responses: It looks like WoW, and is far too scripted, nobody does PvP like that. Discussing the former is a bottomless pit, the "game A stole from game B" complaints are so old that somebody made a joke out of it when LotRO came out and ranted how this Tolkien guy stole elves and orcs from WoW. So I'm going to discuss how people move and fight in PvP.
As Cameron remarked, the WAR PvP video shows people lining up in battle lines. He mentions the British in 1776, but in fact battle lines were still alive and well in the Napoleonic Wars, and only went out of fashion in the American Civil war. But by that time the tactic was two millenia old, predating the Romans, who relied heavily on it. Battle lines in the real world made sense until the advent of heavy artillery and long-rifled muskets. If you fight with a sword or spear or short-ranged firearm, a battle-line keeps you from being outflanked or ganged up upon individually.
In MMORPGs battle lines don't happen due to two major reasons: no collision control, and too good ranged combat with no friendly fire. No collision control means that if you formed a battle line in WoW, the enemy rogues would just run right through you and still stab you in the back. And as ranged combat has auto-targeting with no way to hit somebody else than your target, it is far better to gang up on the most dangerous enemy (e.g. the healer or mage) with all you got than to fight in a line one against one. Even AoE spells are selective in a game like WoW, so any large melee clash on one spot would be hit by mages with blizzards, being sure that these blizzards only hurt the enemy and not their own side. A tank is more or less useless in WoW PvP, because usually he is the least dangerous target and can often simply be ignored. The enemy runs right through him, and there isn't much he can do. A full battle line of tanks shoulder to shoulder just looks silly, because everyone knows how useless it would be.
Now WAR has collision control. Which means that in principle, at least in confined spaces, a battle line of tanks theoretically could prevent the enemies melee characters to break through their ranks and kill the mages or healers in the back. Only that will still not lead to anyone forming battle lines in WAR, because the ranged combat is still too good. Collision control only hinders melee characters, but not a mage who can shoot a fireball quite far, through his own people without hurting them, through any enemies trying to block the path, and still kill the enemy healer without a problem. So unless WAR adds collision control between characters and fireballs, and shooting through your own lines becomes impossible or dangerous, I don't see PvP in WAR happening like in their video.
Comments:
<< Home
Newer› ‹Older
Officially I've stopped following WAR. If I don't at least get into the open beta to try it I don't know if I'll switch from WoW. I don't think my wife will ether.
I've stopped following WAR when I saw beta leaks explaining how far from completeing the game was just a couple months before the announced release date, realising that all those Paul Barnett and Mark Jacobs talk were just missleading marketing...
How PvP plays out is an emergent property of the full underlying game design. Yes, this is not predictable and can only be understood through proper testing.
There have been places where the emergent properties of an mmorpg appears like tactical combat such as battle lines, but the leading mechanics tend to be such as client lag, load times and the ability to break the intended functionality by clever use of emergence.
There have been places where the emergent properties of an mmorpg appears like tactical combat such as battle lines, but the leading mechanics tend to be such as client lag, load times and the ability to break the intended functionality by clever use of emergence.
Syncaine, you can post links to your blog in my comments. Although in this case the two posts are only superficially about the same topic. You stepped right into the trap of trying to dissect why other people's impression that this WAR PvP video was too scripted and looking like WoW was invalid. I was trying to avoid that, and imagine instead how WAR PvP *could* look if not scripted. You said the video shows how collision detection might affect combat, but I would say that the two battle lines stopped because the script said so, not because it would have been impossible to get past the enemy. Of course I don't know how big the zone of control will be in WAR, but in the video the characters stand far too far apart from each other to form a battle line.
I would think though that a battle line would still be effective even if range combat is too good.
Either that or make melee unwanted in most combats.
Just think if there was collision detection in wow you could keep warriors/rogues and other melee classes away from your healers. This would help mitigate some damage and might actually be of some worth in the right situation.
However i fear in WAR that this might make melee undesired for combat and by association make tanks undesired until everyone who is useful on the battlefield is all ranged.
Either that or make melee unwanted in most combats.
Just think if there was collision detection in wow you could keep warriors/rogues and other melee classes away from your healers. This would help mitigate some damage and might actually be of some worth in the right situation.
However i fear in WAR that this might make melee undesired for combat and by association make tanks undesired until everyone who is useful on the battlefield is all ranged.
Who needs fancy links :)
My post was to point out how he missed the mark entirely on the video. Scripting or not, little of what he said did anything but spread false information.
As for the issue of collision detection, I think you might be selling it short. While AoE spells will always be an issue, mages and priests fear melee dps far more than ranged dps in most games, due to the fact that melee dps tends to hit harder (to balance the fact that they need to close the distance to be effective). If nothing else, eliminating ONE source of danger for easily killed targets is a step up from what happens in WoW.
My post was to point out how he missed the mark entirely on the video. Scripting or not, little of what he said did anything but spread false information.
As for the issue of collision detection, I think you might be selling it short. While AoE spells will always be an issue, mages and priests fear melee dps far more than ranged dps in most games, due to the fact that melee dps tends to hit harder (to balance the fact that they need to close the distance to be effective). If nothing else, eliminating ONE source of danger for easily killed targets is a step up from what happens in WoW.
The video in question has a good 30 second intro in which it is explained "This is not RvR" instead just people "beating" on each other. It could have easily been a stress test for zones or just plain scripted fight for a promo. I'm fairly sure this was from a video presentation shown to the EA marketing division which they talked about in another podcast.
Though it is really sad that so many people have ignored what the video says and still insist on calling it PvP.
Though it is really sad that so many people have ignored what the video says and still insist on calling it PvP.
How far are they taking collision detection? Its easy to imagine a line of tanks stopping melee getting through but shouldnt that also stop or hinder line of sight? Can mages target people on the other side of the tank and shoot a fireball through them for example.
It wouldnt seem fair that a rogue gets blocked by a tank and a caster doesnt.
It wouldnt seem fair that a rogue gets blocked by a tank and a caster doesnt.
Although I agree that most people will probably not be organized enough to form battle lines in WAR, I think you're selling the potential of the formation short by ignoring one little aspect of range combat . . range.
Those archers and mages can only shoot or lob fireballs so far. If healers and mages are standing behind their battle line with the intention of healing the battle line and damaging the enemy battle line, ranged attackers on the other side would have to move into melee range of the battle line in order to be in range to attack the 'soft' targets of the other side. Targeting will also be a pain in the ass.
You also can't discount basic human stupidity. Even in wow, which has no collision detection at all, 90% of people don't target healers first in AV unless they're the closest target.
I think a well organized guild capable of pulling off a battle line would be able to steamroll larger numbers of players not so organized. Sure, in an open field people can try to just run around the battle line to get at the squishies, but doing so leaves them open to attack while they make their detour.
Because of collision detection, we could conceivably start seeing the use of all sorts of archaic battle formations - phalanxes, pike squares, who knows.
The masses will undoubtedly be a disorganized rabble (sorry, skirmishers) but I'd love to see a group be organized enough to maintain a classic formation. Even if they were doing it to kill me as I ran around in the disorganized rabble.
Those archers and mages can only shoot or lob fireballs so far. If healers and mages are standing behind their battle line with the intention of healing the battle line and damaging the enemy battle line, ranged attackers on the other side would have to move into melee range of the battle line in order to be in range to attack the 'soft' targets of the other side. Targeting will also be a pain in the ass.
You also can't discount basic human stupidity. Even in wow, which has no collision detection at all, 90% of people don't target healers first in AV unless they're the closest target.
I think a well organized guild capable of pulling off a battle line would be able to steamroll larger numbers of players not so organized. Sure, in an open field people can try to just run around the battle line to get at the squishies, but doing so leaves them open to attack while they make their detour.
Because of collision detection, we could conceivably start seeing the use of all sorts of archaic battle formations - phalanxes, pike squares, who knows.
The masses will undoubtedly be a disorganized rabble (sorry, skirmishers) but I'd love to see a group be organized enough to maintain a classic formation. Even if they were doing it to kill me as I ran around in the disorganized rabble.
I'd like to point out that WAR has a much better model for tanks in pvp, at least from what I've read.
They've actually made tanking matter, by changing the mechanics of taunt. The main reason tanks in wow suck is because they can't do anything to make people want to kill them, so they just kind of attack with their miniscule damage.
WAR's solution to this is to make the taunts apply a debuff to its victim that reduce all damage they deal to anyone who *isn't* the taunter by X% for a certain duration, as well as generating a bunch of threat. This is actually extremely potent for pvp, because it literally makes the tank able to save his or her teammates in pvp, by playing the role of the protector.
I agree that the WAR pvp video doesn't really show that much. It looks a lot like the wow promotional videos they put out for Zul'Aman, or Black Temple. Perhaps if they had treated it as a lore-oriented thing, it would have been received better.
--Rawr
They've actually made tanking matter, by changing the mechanics of taunt. The main reason tanks in wow suck is because they can't do anything to make people want to kill them, so they just kind of attack with their miniscule damage.
WAR's solution to this is to make the taunts apply a debuff to its victim that reduce all damage they deal to anyone who *isn't* the taunter by X% for a certain duration, as well as generating a bunch of threat. This is actually extremely potent for pvp, because it literally makes the tank able to save his or her teammates in pvp, by playing the role of the protector.
I agree that the WAR pvp video doesn't really show that much. It looks a lot like the wow promotional videos they put out for Zul'Aman, or Black Temple. Perhaps if they had treated it as a lore-oriented thing, it would have been received better.
--Rawr
While AoE spells will always be an issue, mages and priests fear melee dps far more than ranged dps in most games, due to the fact that melee dps tends to hit harder (to balance the fact that they need to close the distance to be effective).
Not sure about that. My level 55 mage deals more damage per second than my level 70 tank (because he is tank spec, not dps spec). And the mage deals that damage in bigger chunks, while the warrior deals lots of smaller packages. Never played a rogue long enough to compare damage.
Not sure about that. My level 55 mage deals more damage per second than my level 70 tank (because he is tank spec, not dps spec). And the mage deals that damage in bigger chunks, while the warrior deals lots of smaller packages. Never played a rogue long enough to compare damage.
Not sure about that. My level 55 mage deals more damage per second than my level 70 tank (because he is tank spec, not dps spec). And the mage deals that damage in bigger chunks, while the warrior deals lots of smaller packages. Never played a rogue long enough to compare damage.
A mage is also much more easily shut down than a warrior, when it comes to dealing damage. Your mage does more DPS, but how much DPS can you do if a melee attacker keeps interrupting your spells? How much damage can you do if your target is constantly running out of range, or behind a pillar to avoid line of sight?
I'm not disagreeing with you; the quote you mentioned was wrong. Melee damage doesn't always do more than ranged. The main concern, though, is that melee damage is susceptible to roots and snares, while ranged attackers tends to be vulnerable to melee attackers due to spell pushback, interruption, weaker defensive abilities, etc.
It's a yin and yang thing.
--Rawr
A mage is also much more easily shut down than a warrior, when it comes to dealing damage. Your mage does more DPS, but how much DPS can you do if a melee attacker keeps interrupting your spells? How much damage can you do if your target is constantly running out of range, or behind a pillar to avoid line of sight?
I'm not disagreeing with you; the quote you mentioned was wrong. Melee damage doesn't always do more than ranged. The main concern, though, is that melee damage is susceptible to roots and snares, while ranged attackers tends to be vulnerable to melee attackers due to spell pushback, interruption, weaker defensive abilities, etc.
It's a yin and yang thing.
--Rawr
My issue with this whole brouhaha is:
Why would Mythic post a video like that?
Would any of us, had we been working for Mythic, put that up for public consumption? I see several equally disturbing scenarios:
1) They actually thought it would be well received - Massive naiveite doesn't bode well for people who are designing games. They are *supposed* to know what's cool, that's 80% of their job. If they don't get why that was an awful PR piece, how are they going to design engaging systems?
Where's the badass CG pieces that have no relation to gameplay but OMG is that sweet?
2) That's the best they can offer for viewing - Really? Isn't a beta going on? They can't get 20 real players to *actually* fight?
I am certainly going to try WAR, but to anyone but a true fan, that video looked sad. Releasing sad videos is not a mark of polish.
Why would Mythic post a video like that?
Would any of us, had we been working for Mythic, put that up for public consumption? I see several equally disturbing scenarios:
1) They actually thought it would be well received - Massive naiveite doesn't bode well for people who are designing games. They are *supposed* to know what's cool, that's 80% of their job. If they don't get why that was an awful PR piece, how are they going to design engaging systems?
Where's the badass CG pieces that have no relation to gameplay but OMG is that sweet?
2) That's the best they can offer for viewing - Really? Isn't a beta going on? They can't get 20 real players to *actually* fight?
I am certainly going to try WAR, but to anyone but a true fan, that video looked sad. Releasing sad videos is not a mark of polish.
"battle lines were still alive and well in the Napoleonic Wars, and only went out of fashion in the American Civil war."
Actually, they went out of fashion in World War 1 with the age of the machine gun.
And yes, of course the pvp in the video was fake.
As far as collision detection and mass formations go: unless melee characters are significantly easier to level, you would only see a formation of like 20 guys with 80 healers/casters/archers/stealthers/whatever on the sidelines. Very few people will want to play the role of cannon fodder.
Actually, they went out of fashion in World War 1 with the age of the machine gun.
And yes, of course the pvp in the video was fake.
As far as collision detection and mass formations go: unless melee characters are significantly easier to level, you would only see a formation of like 20 guys with 80 healers/casters/archers/stealthers/whatever on the sidelines. Very few people will want to play the role of cannon fodder.
Well seems like they're sending new invites to people next week so maybe there's hope for it yet... even if I get the key though, I'm not hoping for anything fancy, what I've seen from screen shots, the game doesn't look very amazing...
Anonymous said:
I've stopped following WAR when I saw beta leaks explaining how far from completeing the game was just a couple months before the announced release date, realising that all those Paul Barnett and Mark Jacobs talk were just missleading marketing...
Actually any release date they've put out is a guide-line, not a hard date. Mark Jacobs (Head Dev for WAR) has long held a belief on WAR far similar to that of Blizzards: Release it when it's good, not some preset date. In fact he takes time out of his schedule to post that on the Warhammer Alliance forums.
PS: Sorry for the off-topic post, Tobold.
I've stopped following WAR when I saw beta leaks explaining how far from completeing the game was just a couple months before the announced release date, realising that all those Paul Barnett and Mark Jacobs talk were just missleading marketing...
Actually any release date they've put out is a guide-line, not a hard date. Mark Jacobs (Head Dev for WAR) has long held a belief on WAR far similar to that of Blizzards: Release it when it's good, not some preset date. In fact he takes time out of his schedule to post that on the Warhammer Alliance forums.
PS: Sorry for the off-topic post, Tobold.
I hope the game is good. Will have to wait and see, I suppose.
I must admit, I don't fully comprehend the impact of Collision Detection, but to me, all it sounds like is a nerf for DPS Warriors and/or Rogues, while improving the importance of tanks.
As my preferred type of toon is ranged DPS, my tactics are still going to be the same. Hang out in the back, and pew-pew. I don't see how a formation will change that, as I'm still going to try to kite/root you if you're melee and chasing me. And a premade will still wipe out a PUG regardless of whether collision detection exists or not.
Post a Comment
I must admit, I don't fully comprehend the impact of Collision Detection, but to me, all it sounds like is a nerf for DPS Warriors and/or Rogues, while improving the importance of tanks.
As my preferred type of toon is ranged DPS, my tactics are still going to be the same. Hang out in the back, and pew-pew. I don't see how a formation will change that, as I'm still going to try to kite/root you if you're melee and chasing me. And a premade will still wipe out a PUG regardless of whether collision detection exists or not.
<< Home