User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Open World by design can not have faction imbalances. That is impossible. That doesn't mean open world PvP has to fail. It fails largely due to zerging and faction imbalance.
This is exactly what it means. And this is why this has failed in EVERY MMO it has ever been implemented in. Your idea (as usual) is not new. It is broken by design.

So how will you balance factions so your idea is viable?

I can give you a hint to the solution of faction imbalances... It rhymes with sharding and starts with an "s". Why dont we add sharding to Classic so your idea can function? Does that sound good?

Obviously, open world can not be balanced in terms of population. Sharding is not a necessary solution. Do not compare this to what some other game was doing. Those games encourage Zerg gameplay. Frontiers are intended to discourage it. Just as faction imbalance is inevitable in the open world, so is zerging. Players will zerg, but it can always be mitigated by design. Only award honor to the group that deals the most damage to the target. This way adding onto fights gives no honor. Dramatically decrease the honor reward for each additonal player that is added to a group. Groups with 5 players roaming would earn vastly lower Honor than groups roaming as a duo. There are ways to eliminate Zerg type behavior, and besides having specific objectives such as Keep Fights might discourage them from roaming. I know how these "Open World PvP" MMOs work. I spent this past year working on a Dark Age of Camelot server. That game was always flawed, and it boiled down to the group based PvP of the game. You need to design it around solo play, otherwise you have large groups farming solos/small mans and the population dies off.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Obviously, open world can not be balanced in terms of population. Sharding is not a necessary solution. Do not compare this to what some other game was doing. Those games encourage Zerg gameplay.
Sharding is the only solution that has demonstratively worked in this regard. You have (yet again) taken a failed idea and redelivered it without innovating anything about the idea. What started as an open world concept, now has player count restrictions... Effectively adding barriers and making this concept NOT an open world PvP scenario. This is just the same as an instanced BG, only there is no guaruntee that the player count will be equal... The idea is bad.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Frontiers are intended to discourage it.
Frontiers didnt even consider this idea until we outlined how awful it was and highlighted some of the most obvious glaring issues... You are now playing damage control and spending more time trying to defend and salvage your idea, rather than looking at the situation objectively.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Just as faction imbalance is inevitable in the open world, so is zerging. Players will zerg...
And thus rewriting PvP and allowing players to be rewarded from zerging, being rewarded with PvP items by doing PvE actions and allowing players to compete in an imbalanced environment that will be inherently broken, is a terrible, awful, poorly thought out idea.

So now that you have added restrictions and this is no longer an open world concept because there are population limits on each faction, how do you plan on balancing the remaining players, as this idea is dead on arrival without balance and is already not an open world concept...?

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
Sharding is the only solution that has demonstratively worked in this regard. You have (yet again) taken a failed idea and redelivered it without innovating anything about the idea. What started as an open world concept, now has player count restrictions... Effectively adding barriers and making this concept NOT an open world PvP scenario. This is just the same as an instanced BG, only there is no guaruntee that the player count will be equal... The idea is bad.
You make some good points, but sharding does not solve zerging, and it makes it so that you end up playing with players from other servers. That is not a good thing. I have suggested ways to fix the issues with other Open World PvP MMOs.

- Higher diminishing returns on full groups. More than there currently is. Substantially more honor for solo/duo/trio.
- Only the group or player that deals the most damage to an enemy will receive honor for a kill. Zergs won't be able to add and leech honor.
- Allow for players to enter on Zeppelins or Boats that travel across or around the Frontier. This way there are no chokepoints where players can zerg.

If earning honor in a zerg is really bad, then wouldn't these players just do battlegrounds instead? Classic WoW gives them that option. Open World PvP MMOs mostly did not have battlegrounds. Do I think that having a server-wide battleground using this system could work? Sure, but it can be acheived without a queue system in the open world.

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
And thus rewriting PvP and allowing players to be rewarded from zerging, being rewarded with PvP items by doing PvE actions and allowing players to compete in an imbalanced environment that will be inherently broken, is a terrible, awful, poorly thought out idea.

So now that you have added restrictions and this is no longer an open world concept because there are population limits on each faction, how do you plan on balancing the remaining players, as this idea is dead on arrival without balance and is already not an open world concept...?
Obviously, you do not want players idling doing PvE to earn honor. The main purpose for even having objectives is to spread players out. This is designed as a more competitive form of World PvP, where players who play solo can potentially earn the most honor. It also remove the low level griefing and camping that you see in the open world. I think that discouraging zerg roaming at all costs is vital. That is something none of these other MMOs accomplished. As I stated before, even if there is a faction imbalance in a frontier, if players are roaming in small groups, then how is that as detrimental? Most of the time you would be unlikely to encounter two enemy small groups at the same time.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Sharding does not solve zerging, and it makes it so that you end up playing with players from other servers. That is not a good thing. I have suggested ways to fix the issues with other Open World PvP MMOs.
Yes it does. "Zerging in WoW is a term that now means attacking an enemy (or a group of enemies) with a far bigger group of weaker units". Sharding limits the amount of players in any one zone and acts as a balance between both factions. This quite literally balances groups of players ensuring that one faction can not overwhelm the other faction by zerging. This can be seen in retail raids where a raid group will start to phase out and not be able to help their raid on the same shard.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
If earning honor in a zerg is really bad...
Earning honor for PvE actions is even worse. Completely deteriorates the integrity of the game.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Obviously, you do not want players idling doing PvE to earn honor. The main purpose for even having objectives is to spread players out. This is designed as a more competitive form of World PvP, where players who play solo can earn the most honor. I think that discouraging zerg roaming at all costs is vital. That is something none of these other MMOs accomplished. As I stated before, even if there is a faction imbalance in a frontier, if players are roaming in small groups, then how is that as detrimental? Most of the time you would be unlikely to encounter two enemy small groups at the same time.
It does not matter what your intent is. Players will play. No one cares what you intend to do. Based on what you have said you want to do, your idea will fail. You have to do one thing to validate your idea, and that is to offer a way to balance factions in an open world PvP encounter. Othewise your idea is dead on arrival. Can you do that?

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
Druid Restoration
User avatar
OC Yojamba
Posts: 969
Likes: 773
Tauren
Druid
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Ahhhh I get it now, post a controversial topic that @Stfuppercut will enjoy debating, and farm posts to level 60. Well played @RedridgeGnoll, well played...

Also, once again - I don't think you want Classic WoW.

   Stfuppercut Erik
ImageImage Lvl 60
ImageImage Lvl 43
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
Yes it does. "Zerging in WoW is a term that now means attacking an enemy (or a group of enemies) with a far bigger group of weaker units" Zerging limits the amount of players in any one zone and acts as a balance between both factions. This quite literally balances groups of players ensuring that one faction can not overwhelm the other faction. This can be seen in retail raids where a raid group will start to phase out and not be able to help their raid on the same shard.
Your consistent criticism of faction imbalance is a legitimate one. That is why battlegrounds work, because large groups of players are matched evenly against eachother. Having an equal number of players in a zone will not prevent players from zerging eachother. If you do not make other changes, then a large group of players can "zerg" a smaller group of players. You need other measures to discourage that type of behavior. These Frontier zones are entirely balanced around solo, small man. Not 10v10 or 15v15 or 40v40.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
Earning honor for PvE actions is even worse. Completely deteriorates the integrity of the game.
The fastest way to rank up in Classic WoW is by capping uncontested flags and objectives. Premades turn the battlegrounds into PvE encounters basically. I am not suggesting making objectives in the Frontiers an efficient way to earn honor. They are merely landmarks that lead players to roam the zones.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
It does not matter what your intent is. Players will play. No one cares what you intend to do. Based on what you have said you want to do, your idea will fail. You have to do one thing to validate your idea, and that is to offer a way to balance factions in an open world PvP encounter. Othewise your idea is dead on arrival. Can you do that?
You are equating faction imbalances with zergs overrunning a zone. PvP servers have faction imbalances in contested zones, does that mean that underpopulated factions cant successfully World PvP? No. Frontiers actually offer underpopulation bonuses. The goal is to make them small scale PvP zones, so even if your faction is outnumbered, you won't be run over by large groups the entire time. Competitive players want small scale PvP. They don't want 10v10 or 15v15.

Dark Age of Camelot factions never had balanced populations. It wasn't the faction imbalances that sunk the game, it was the advantages that large groups possessed. The game was catered towards large groups in the Frontiers. They did have underpopulation bonuses which helped, but it was the focus on large group PvP that was the true imbalance.

For example. Group sizes were 8 instead of 5. There were classes that could give run speed boosts to an entire group allowing them to run at 2x speed. You can imagine the issues this could create. It was not solo friendly.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
You are equating faction imbalances with zergs overrunning a zone.
Which is exactly what happens in a truly open world PvP area.

Without faction balance. Your idea is void.

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
You are equating faction imbalances with zergs overrunning a zone.
Which is exactly what happens in a truly open world PvP area.

Without faction balance. Your idea is void.
Even if the factions are balanced, players can still zerg. Alterac Valley is 40 vs 40. Guess what happens? It is a zergfest. The map is too narrow, there are too many chokepoints, and playing as a zerg is too rewarding. It isn't about just equal faction populations. That is not the real issue. You need to discourage that type of gameplay entirely, and Frontiers begin to do that. If there are 80 Horde and 40 Alliance in a Frontier, and most everyone is in small groups, then is zerging or faction imbalance reall that much of an issue?

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Even if the factions are balanced, players can still zerg. Alterac Valley is 40 vs 40. Guess what happens? It is a zergfest. The map is too narrow, there are too many chokepoints, and playing as a zerg is too rewarding. It isn't about just equal faction populations. That is not the real issue. You need to discourage that type of gameplay entirely, and Frontiers begin to do that. If there are 80 Horde and 40 Alliance in a Frontier, and most everyone is in small groups, then is zerging or faction imbalance reall that much of an issue?
No. There is a difference between a zerg, an imbalance in players that slosh opponents due to their sheer population, and an organized group of individuals that happen to be part of a large team. AV is balanced. You can not zerg AV. Both teams have 40 players.

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Even if the factions are balanced, players can still zerg. Alterac Valley is 40 vs 40. Guess what happens? It is a zergfest. The map is too narrow, there are too many chokepoints, and playing as a zerg is too rewarding. It isn't about just equal faction populations. That is not the real issue. You need to discourage that type of gameplay entirely, and Frontiers begin to do that. If there are 80 Horde and 40 Alliance in a Frontier, and most everyone is in small groups, then is zerging or faction imbalance reall that much of an issue?
No. There is a difference between a zerg, an imbalance in players that slosh opponents due to their sheer population, and an organized group of individuals that happen to be part of a large team. AV is balanced. You can not zerg AV. Both teams have 40 players.
The purpose of Frontiers is to enforce small scale PvP, not large group PvP. That way players do not encounter situations where they are outnumbered 10 to 1. Competitive PvP in WoW is best achieved through small scale. 1v1, 2v2, 3v3. This is what Frontiers are trying offer.

Even if you have an even number of players in a Frontier, such as 40 v 40, that does not prevent players from engaing in large group PvP. The key for this to succeed is for it to be designed for solo/small groups. Could there be objectives which involve 40v40 fights. Possibly, but the preferable group size would be 3 or less.

I am suggesting distributing honor in ways that will incentivize small groups to roam. That is the key.

- Higher diminishing returns on full groups. More than there currently is. Substantially more honor for solo/duo/trio.
- Only the group or player that deals the most damage to an enemy will receive honor for a kill. Zergs won't be able to add and leech honor.
- Allow for players to enter on Zeppelins or Boats that travel across or around the Frontier. This way there are no chokepoints where players can zerg.

Could there be a Keep fight that awards anyone who participates in it. Sure. That could be where large scale PvP happens. Open World PvP dies when large groups start roaming.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
The purpose of Frontiers is to enforce small scale PvP, not large group PvP.
Probably a bad idea to frame your idea in an open world large scale PvP format then huh? "I want to empower small teams, I know, I'll make a huge open world BG concept that favors zergs! And then I will try and police that experience and add a ton of restrictions so that small teams do well! Now no one is happy and ive ruined PvP! Whats more? I'll allow you to gain honor from PvE objectives!!!" Makes sense.

The real question is, how are you going to balance factions in an open world PvP format?

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
The purpose of Frontiers is to enforce small scale PvP, not large group PvP.
Probably a bad idea to frame your idea in an open world large scale PvP format then huh? "I want to empower small teams, I know, I'll make a huge open world BG concept that favors zergs! And then I will try and police that experience and add a ton of restrictions so that small teams do well! Now no one is happy and ive ruined PvP! Whats more? I'll allow you to gain honor from PvE objectives!!!" Makes sense.

The real question is, how are you going to balance factions in an open world PvP format?
You balance it by giving the highest honor rewards to small scale PvP. If you have 100 Horde and 50 Alliance in a Frontier, and most everyone is roaming in small groups of 2-3, then the faction imbalance is not consequential. There will be more Horde small mans, but they will not be incentivized to band together to outnumber the Alliance in fights. You are in a sense competing with other Horde groups. If you enter the frontier with your 3man group, it isn't 3 v100, it is more like 3 vs a bunch horde groups scattered across the zone. The honor that groups would earn from PvP kills would be restricted to the group dealing the most damage. There would be underpopulation honor bonuses.
If you are in a Horde duo roaming a Frontier, of course you will come across tons of Horde groups, but you will go your separate way to seek out Alliance groups. Having a mechanic where players can enter the Frontier from many directions is also important. You can't have chokepoints in zones. Contested Territory in WoW has chokepoints which is a problem. A lot of Open World MMOs suffer from this. It leads to camping. I have suggested adding Boats for Alliance or Zeppelins for Horde that players would use to enter a Frontier.

In contested zones on PvP servers there is always a faction imbalance. There is still a lot of World PvP. Open World PvP breaks down when players vastly outnumber their enemies, but also when large groups become the norm. Most players do not want to play in large groups, they want to group with a few others and just go find action.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
You balance it by giving the highest honor rewards to small scale PvP.
If your concept is truly an open world experience, this is anything but small scale.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
If you have 100 Horde and 50 Alliance in a Frontier, and most everyone is roaming in small groups of 2-3, then the faction imbalance is not consequential.
Are you dense? Read this again and tell me you believe this.

You cant seem to grasp how this works... Either this is a pure open world experience and thus player imbalance will ruin this OR you are putting arbitrary restrictions on population and this is no longer open world. Whether youre aiming to reward large scale conflict or small scale, it doesnt matter. Your intent, doesnt mean anything to anyone. Players will play. Players will zerg. If they can bring 100 players to the BG. They will. If they can smother the enemy faction, they will. If there is no balance, this is going to be a terrible experience. You can not have an open world concept AND balance without sharding. If you can, please describe how you plan to have an open world environment (truly open to all players) and still maintain a faction balance. This is a requirement for your idea to be viable. I dont care about incentives. Im not interested in your intent. How will you maintain a balanced faction outcome?

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
You balance it by giving the highest honor rewards to small scale PvP.
If your concept is truly an open world experience, this is anything but small scale.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
If you have 100 Horde and 50 Alliance in a Frontier, and most everyone is roaming in small groups of 2-3, then the faction imbalance is not consequential.
Are you dense? Read this again and tell me you believe this.

You cant seem to grasp how this works... Either this is a pure open world experience and thus player imbalance will ruin this OR you are putting arbitrary restrictions on population and this is no longer open world. Whether youre aiming to reward large scale conflict or small scale, it doesnt matter. Your intent, doesnt mean anything to anyone. Players will play. Players will zerg. If they can bring 100 players to the BG. They will. If they can smother the enemy faction, they will. If there is no balance, this is going to be a terrible experience. You can not have an open world concept AND balance without sharding. If you can, please describe how you plan to have an open world environment (truly open to all players) and still maintain a faction balance. This is a requirement for your idea to be viable. I dont care about incentives. Im not interested in your intent. How will you maintain a balanced faction outcome?
You keep claiming that just if there is a faction population imbalance then Frontiers won't work. This isn't like Alterac Valley where both factions are in a raid group. If it is 40v15 in Alterac Valley, then yes the overpopulated faction will dominate. The map is full of chokepoints and the honor reward is earned through zerging a PvE boss. The Frontier does not work like that. Of course there will be the potential for a zerg, but players would for the most part earn no honor for doing that. If the honor reward is bad for zerging, then many of those players will return to Battlegrounds like AV. Do you need sharidng in contested zones in classic? No. There is always a population imbalance, but you can still do World PvP. Let's discuss a scenario in detail. Random battlegrouns have even numbers typically, but they are so imbalanced once premade groups are involved. Many battlegrounds involve one side capping all the objectives within a few minutes, while the enemy team huddles behind a fence watching the timer expire.


This is a Frontier Zone. There essentially no chokepoints, and players can choose to enter the Frontier by disembarking from a Boat or Zeppelin that crosses the zone. Small scale PvP is highly incentivized Let's say there are 100 Horde in the Frontier and 20 Alliance. Your Alliance duo then enters the Frontier. Your duo is not facing the 100 Horde, but rather groups of Horde that are roaming the zone. Is it possible you get sandwiched in between Horde groups? Of course, but the Horde groups will be roaming the entire map. This is nothing like what Blizzard has implemented before. The lack of chokepoints, the removal of honor through zerging, underpopulation bonuses, incentivizing small groups etc.. are all features that MMOs failed to combine in Open World PvP.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Is this open world? Yes. Can you balance the factions? If the answer is no, your idea is flawed and wont work. Its just that simple.

Having a faction imbalance of 100 - 20 is the exact issue here. You have 40-50 of the overpopulated faction running around completing PvE objectives for free honor which destroys the integrity of the game. You have the other 50 or so decimating the 20 underpopulated players and graveyard camping them, which destroys the competitive scene in the game. It wont matter what you intend on doing... The players will play. The players will zerg. Without faction balance, your idea is dead on arrival.

You will either incentivize player interaction and player imbalance will ruin the experience OR you will incentivize objectives and players will avoid one another and this will not be a PvP encounter. Have you ever played video games before? Ever? Any of them?

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
Is this open world? Yes. Can you balance the factions? If the answer is no, your idea is flawed and wont work. Its just that simple.

Having a faction imbalance of 100 - 20 is the exact issue here. You have 40-50 of the overpopulated faction running around completing PvE objectives for free honor which destroys the integrity of the game. You have the other 50 or so decimating the 20 underpopulated players and graveyard camping them, which destroys the competitive scene in the game. It wont matter what you intend on doing... The players will play. The players will zerg. Without faction balance, your idea is dead on arrival.
Then how is there constant World PvP on PvP servers? Even if a Frontier has 100 Horde and 20 Alliance, the 100 Horde wouldn't be roaming together. The Alliance groups aren't fighting all the Horde at once. You have tons of groups roaming the entire zone. It's not like all Horde groups would converge on once Alliance group at the same time. I already mentioned how zerging would award basically no honor. This isn't like other Open World PvP MMOs where there are no battlegrounds. Players have alternatives in Classic WoW. This entire Frontier system is designed to incentivize small scale PvPers.

Premade crossrealm battlegrounds don't harm the "integrity of the game"? 5 minutes Arathi Basin PvE stomps over and over?

I agree that uncontested PvE objectives rewarding honor can problematic. It might be necessary for players to earn honor through contested objectives like they do in battlegrounds. Whether it is capturing a location or taking over a keep. The objectives would be points of interest essentially to move players around the zone. There would be no graveyard camping. When you die you respawn and board a boat or zeppelin to enter the frontier. You can enter the frontier from basically anywhere using boats/zeppelins. That is why there is no camping or chokepoints. Which solves a major issue.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Then how is there constant World PvP on PvP servers?
Because this is organic. Players who participate are not doing world PvP as a means to their end, they are doing it because they want to. They may be incentivized to do so in an effort to secure and objective or foothold, but this is not a scripted encounter, this is organic and players are opting to participate. You are trying to capture that same experience, sterilize it, ring ALL the fun out of it, suck the essence of joy out of it, suck all the color out of it and paint in gray, and then force feed it down the playerbases throat, and it will not work. It wont work because it has never worked. Ever.

You are trying to create a poorly thought out emulation of what already exists and works in Classic WoW. The game does not need this.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Premade battlegrounds don't harm the "integrity of the game"? 5 minutes Arathi Basin PvE stomps over and over?
Not to the same extent because even an underpopulated faction can amass 15 players and they are guaranteed that when they DO join the BG, they will start off on an even playing field which is a FAR cry from what you are suggesting. What you are suggesting would quite literally rip communities apart in a very short amount of time.

This idea is broken. Its not good. It is poorly thought out and has been done. It has been done in ways that are superior to your own and has still failed in many MMO's.

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
Because this is organic. Players who participate are not doing world PvP as a means to their end, they are doing it because they want to. They may be incentivized to do so in an effort to secure and objective or foothold, but this is not a scripted encounter, this is organic and players are opting to participate. You are trying to capture that same experience, sterilize it, ring ALL the fun out of it, suck the essence of joy out of it, suck all the color out of it and paint in gray, and then force feed it down the playerbases throat, and it will not work. It wont work because it has never worked. Ever.

You are trying to create a poorly thought out emulation of what already exists and works in Classic WoW. The game does not need this.
A lot of Classic World PvP involves ganking level 48 players or griefing a flightmaster. Frontiers are about incentivizing level 60 small scale PvP without player griefing. The goal is actually to make World PvP more competitive and structured. That is what competitive players want. That is what keeps PvP relevant in an MMO.

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
This idea is broken. Its not good. It is poorly thought out and has been done. It has been done in ways that are superior to your own and has still failed in many MMO's.
Really I'd like some examples, because WoW sure isn't one of them I've seen what other MMORPGs have done, and I have addressed many of the issues with them. Assuming there is some absurd faction imbalance like 100 Horde and 20 Alliance, how does that make a Frontier unplayable, if most players are roaming the zone in small groups? You keep saying that players will consistently zerg, eventhough there would be little to no honor reward for doing so. I actually think large scale PvP is fine if the rewards come from fighting over contested Keeps/Castles. These players literally have an alternative to do battleground instead also.

I showed you the map of a Frontier zone, and am not convinced that a faction imbalance in the zone would somehow prevent fair fights from happening. When the underpopulated faction enters the zone with a small group, they would be able to enter the zone from anywhere. The Horde groups would be spread across the whole zone.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Really I'd like some examples
WAR. SWTOR. I could list others, but these are the two that suffered the most from similar design implementations. The idea doesnt work.

Tell me how youre going to balance the factions and im all ears.

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1041
Likes: 786
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
please describe how you plan to have an open world environment (truly open to all players) and still maintain a faction balance. This is a requirement for your idea to be viable. I dont care about incentives. Im not interested in your intent. How will you maintain a balanced faction outcome?
kek

there is no faction balance, just arbitrary numbers and MS paint drawings

in for the post farming

   Stfuppercut
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Really I'd like some examples
WAR. SWTOR. I could list others, but these are the two that suffered the most from similar design implementations. The idea doesnt work.

Tell me how youre going to balance the factions and im all ears.
Warhammer Online did a million things wrong. I was there. The company that made that game also developed Dark Age of Camelot. One advantage Dark Age of Camelot had was there being 3 factions. So the two underpopulated factions could team up against the bigger faction. As somebody who played Dark Age of Camelot in its heyday, and spent this last year working on a Dark Age of Camelot server, I have some perspective on Open World PvP. The biggest issue by far with Dark Age of Camelot was not the faction imbalances. It was the group oriented nature of the game. The game was not designed for solo/small mans, which is what the majority of players prefer. Another prevailing issue were chokepoints. Factions were often funneled into chokepoints when trying to access other PvP zones. This was eventually changed in Dark Age of Camelot. Players could use boats to enter any part of a frontier zone. However, the group focus of the game was always its downfall. Players don't want to wait around for 7 groupmates to logon or for a zerg to form. They want to just go PvP.


I think we both agree that small scale PvP is vital for World PvP in an MMO. It is so easy to let zergs just destroy it. If you don't basically banish zerging, then you can't have open world pvp. Part of the reason why it works in Classic WoW to a degree, is because most players in contested zones are not looking for fights. They are gathering resources or traveling to instances. The PvP is a side effect of interaction between the two factions.

Here is the reality. Let's say that Western Plaguelands now gave 10x honor in World PvP. The outcome would be obvious. Zergs would rule the zone and camp flight masters. It would be a total disaster. I don't assert that this Frontier idea I have for Classic WoW is foolproof. However, it is worth considering, because of how it differs from the World PvP systems that existed in other MMOs. I used the Wandering Isle as an example of a frontier zone. There would be no choke points or zone-in areas that could be camped, because players could enter the zone from anywhere using Boats/Zeppelins. When an Alliance enters a Frontier zone, the Horde would have no idea where they might be. If there are 20 horde groups roaming the zone and only a few Alliance groups, there is no way to determine where the Alliance groups are entering the zone. They could enter from anywhere. Why would the Horde groups gang up and roam together when only one group would ever receive honor? Players care about honor. If the honor gains are awful for zergs, then they will likely leave. If the Alliance was earning 2-3x as much honor per kill for being underpopulated in a frontier, I am sure that skilled Alliance PvPers would join the Frontier to gank incompetent horde players. Why wouldn't they if the honor reward was that substantial?

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
please describe how you plan to have an open world environment (truly open to all players) and still maintain a faction balance. This is a requirement for your idea to be viable. I dont care about incentives. Im not interested in your intent. How will you maintain a balanced faction outcome?
kek

there is no faction balance, just arbitrary numbers and MS paint drawings

in for the post farming
Maybe if I draw more lines on this map... That'll do the trick!

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1041
Likes: 786
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
please describe how you plan to have an open world environment (truly open to all players) and still maintain a faction balance. This is a requirement for your idea to be viable. I dont care about incentives. Im not interested in your intent. How will you maintain a balanced faction outcome?
kek

there is no faction balance, just arbitrary numbers and MS paint drawings

in for the post farming
Maybe if I draw more lines on this map... That'll do the trick!


It all makes sense now

   Stfuppercut
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 year ago
please describe how you plan to have an open world environment (truly open to all players) and still maintain a faction balance. This is a requirement for your idea to be viable. I dont care about incentives. Im not interested in your intent. How will you maintain a balanced faction outcome?
kek

there is no faction balance, just arbitrary numbers and MS paint drawings

in for the post farming
Maybe if I draw more lines on this map... That'll do the trick!


It all makes sense now
The Blue lines encirlcing the zone are for Alliance Boats dropping players off. The Red lines crossing the middle of the zone represent Horde Zeppelins dropping players off across the zone. I don't know what your lines represent.

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
The Blue lines encirlcing the zone are for Alliance Boats dropping players off. The Red lines crossing the middle of the zone represent Horde Zeppelins dropping players off across the zone. I don't know what your lines represent.
So you were planning on giving horde mid control at the start of the game with higher access to the entire map? Jesus Christ... Have you actually ever played a video game before? I just imagine the horde mages launching off the zepp with slowfall in all directions immediately grabbing every valuable node while the alliance are slowly waiting to find a spot to jump off, and then swim 10-20 yards before being able to mount... Start every match losing. Sick PvP idea dude.

I think you need to join a battleground and play a few matches before you try and innovate the entire PvP experience.

g0bledyg00k wrote:
11 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
Similar topics
to 'Introducing World PvP Frontiers'
Posts ViewsLast post

Latest Blue Posts

View all
  • Screenshot of the Month

    View gallery