Friday with Means - May 21st, 2010 - Instability in Greece caused by Macrosun!

[Crowena]

Some like that it's harder to change setup in AO, some don't. It's another give/take situation that, while it has its share of good aspects for some people, can also make it hard for other people to enjoy/get into PvP.

For some professions that practically forces you to select between PvM and PvP. If your time is limited then, you are pretty much stuck with PvM. Unfortunately I don't see any way to fix that problem without taking away part of the attraction for serious PvP crowd (or adding a whole lot of potential exploits).

[Ayria]

This is true. It's hard for new players, or even average long term players, to get into PvP when the differences between characters are so big.

The Collector instance (pre whine induced nerf) was on the way to closing that gap.

[PhoenixOfAges]

I haven't said anything to the contrary. In fact I have not only already pointed out that a new PvP area might cause some harm but I have also already said that if we get a new open PvP area that works well, then I'd rather see us use that and then just remove BS rather than keeping both and not having enough people for either.

But some people like BSs and should the new zones be free for all types will pout and sit at the terminals to dead BSs and bitch on the forums that FC ruined the game. Should FC yank BSs those that prefer BSs will rage on the forums and may just rage quit out of the game.

Again, explaining why some places are empty, is not automatically a reasoning as to why I think we should get new places. It's just an explenation as to why some places are empty. Nothing more.

That's why I've always been saying it's better to adjust what we have than just add more. We can be fairly certain they will not pull BSs even if they all go permanently dead. We still have Will to Fight which never got off the ground for instance. So some will still want to do this, some will still want to do that but there will be the other as well eventually which some will want to do but none will work all that well if at all.

"Although there isn't the large volume of people into PvP looking to regularly PvP in game that you claim there is as is evident by the current state of PvP content in game."

^
This is kinda the topic I originally chimed in on. I personally think there are more people willing and wanting to PvP than we see evidence of in game atm. My point was always that various issues with varies things related to PvP is a bigger reason for why people don't PvP much rather than how they actually feel about PvP in general on a personal level.

So let's say people largely feel that it would be a great idea to add a huge raid zone that takes 200 people to complete, even by our standards so would be about 500 by FC's. They add it and... it never works. Great use of time and resources that was.

There's a big difference between feeling like doing something and actually going out to do it. One gets something done, the other doesn't. So let's say there are a lot of people that feel like PvPing, fact is that they're not doing so now. As they're not now and didn't when BSs were first added we can reasonably expect they won't get around to doing the new zones that much either nor will they at that point suddenly find the time to do the others they aren't doing much if at all now.

Adding content that FC wants us to actively use as they quite obviously did for BSs and most likely will for these new ones at a time like this knowing it's likely they will end up having activity issues is not a good idea. To compound the problem with BSs FC tried to pull the unwilling and unprepared into a PvP zone to get VP which those people will use towards something other than PvP. As the new zones will also offer VP it is not unreasonable to expect the same sort of tactic will be used if/when those have problems as they're still using it now with BSs as seen with the inclusion of that VP mission which sends you to BSs.

What happens now is someone new asks where they're suppose to get VP and are told to go to BSs or farm missions till their eyes bleed. The BS at their lvl then either doesn't run or may not run often and if they get in they get spanked over and over. If the new zones only require you to avoid AFK to get VP ticking in over time they go there to either stand around alone doing nothing or get torn apart repeatedly. It doesn't help us keep people and most especially not keep new pay people in the game.

---------------

The Collector instance (pre whine induced nerf) was on the way to closing that gap.

To a certain degree and then only for endgame when it comes to the nodrop stuff.

[Wrangeline]

*snip*

Yeah, there's a lot of truth in what you say.

I think this new PvP zone is interesting but that's only because it's something new and anything new is interesting to me. If I were Means however, I would try and "fix" NW instead of making that zone though. At least fix NW first.

One of the problems with NW is that "blue" is able to beat "red" to the point where blue has nothing to attack any more and red has nothing to defend. Which turns "war" into an "occupation". I want to keep it as a "war". If the losing side gets zerged enough, they stop trying. They can't successfully keep their bases. Because of this, I made a thread in the suggestion forum a while ago where I suggested that in addition to the NW bases we have now that can change hands, we should have some bases that are forever omni and some bases that are forever clan. These bases can be brought down to give the attacking side some form of bonus-reward but when the base is taken down, it wont fall to the attackers ownership. It will simply be disabled for X amounts of hours and then rebuild itself afterwards.

That way, no matter how imbalanced NW is, both sides always got something to attack and defend.

As for VP and BS, people often like to say that VP is a "PvP reward". Parts of me agree with that and other parts of me doesn't. I think at this point in time it's better to look at the practical aspect of it rather than trying to define what it is or what it is supposed to be. So instead of me looking at it as a PvP reward where the rewards themselves are PvP items that have PvP-stats, which is a PvP alternative to PvM armor like Alien armor, instance loot and such, I can simply look at it from a practical point of view and say this:

The VP-rewards are intended for both PVP'ers and PvM'ers. PvP'ers can choose to get it through PVP in BS and PvM'ers can choose to get it through some other means. Basically, these rewards give PvP'ers the option to get it through the type of combat that they enjoy while PvM'ers can get it through the type of combat or activities that they enjoy.

VP-gain from LE missions is a joke. No one should be expected to farm 70k VP when they get 9 VP per clump. Having that said though, I don't think it's great design either for people to only get VP from one repetitive thing like LE-missions. So I guess I would up the VP gain from LE-missions a bit by upping VP-gain from clumps and add a small VP-reward upon defeating the boss. Then I would add daily missions that doesn't involve PVP but does reward VP. Then I would perhaps take it a step further and have RK-missions give a VP-reward upon completion.

Stuff like that.

[samba9]

cant believe it...
seriously instead of acting international major company with china crew, visio conferences, and useless expensive suff you should hire a couple of good artists who has the skill to match to the game.

my 2 cents for graphical improvement in ao is to go stylish, mainly by working the lights and shadows and going more deep in the sharp straight line style of environment and characters. a good abstract composition is way better than the heavy glossy polygoned stuff we see in games these days.
for the originals heads, since they are true artwork i would just add a very few polygons on the forehead and neck and thats it.

[Nukemon]

One of the problems with NW is that "blue" is able to beat "red" to the point where blue has nothing to attack any more and red has nothing to defend. Which turns "war" into an "occupation". I want to keep it as a "war". If the losing side gets zerged enough, they stop trying. They can't successfully keep their bases. Because of this, I made a thread in the suggestion forum a while ago where I suggested that in addition to the NW bases we have now that can change hands, we should have some bases that are forever omni and some bases that are forever clan. These bases can be brought down to give the attacking side some form of bonus-reward but when the base is taken down, it wont fall to the attackers ownership. It will simply be disabled for X amounts of hours and then rebuild itself afterwards.

That way, no matter how imbalanced NW is, both sides always got something to attack and defend.

Really like that idea.
Make a building for all the tower ranges. And if it goes down all players in that range lose their benefit from their towers for 24/48 hours. A sort of central mining uplink station thingie. This would make those towers a focal point for pvp.

[Ebondevil]

All these new heads...Id be way more happy if Funcom would fix their current client first so that ALL videocards get detected (especially geforce 7 series). Why handout people 30 days for free when they can bareley play this game at all because the client is so borked that it wont detect all videocards?

more similar issues can be found here:
http://forums.anarchyonline.com/showthread.php?t=543513

New heads are being designed by artists for use in the new Engine which needs a new client which is being built by the coders. Both are being worked on, the heads don't slow the new client/engine down, nor does the new client/engine slow the heads down.

[Graharbos]

So instead of me looking at it as a PvP reward where the rewards themselves are PvP items that have PvP-stats, which is a PvP alternative to PvM armor like Alien armor, instance loot and such, I can simply look at it from a practical point of view and say this:

The VP-rewards are intended for both PVP'ers and PvM'ers. PvP'ers can choose to get it through PVP in BS and PvM'ers can choose to get it through some other means. Basically, these rewards give PvP'ers the option to get it through the type of combat that they enjoy while PvM'ers can get it through the type of combat or activities that they enjoy.

VP-gain from LE missions is a joke. No one should be expected to farm 70k VP when they get 9 VP per clump. Having that said though, I don't think it's great design either for people to only get VP from one repetitive thing like LE-missions. So I guess I would up the VP gain from LE-missions a bit by upping VP-gain from clumps and add a small VP-reward upon defeating the boss. Then I would add daily missions that doesn't involve PVP but does reward VP. Then I would perhaps take it a step further and have RK-missions give a VP-reward upon completion.

Stuff like that.

It should have been this way from the start imo.. I like this.. and I know the pvp items sounds like other mmo's but it would be nice. It just makes more sense altogether.

[PhoenixOfAges]

One of the problems with NW is that "blue" is able to beat "red" to the point where blue has nothing to attack any more and red has nothing to defend. Which turns "war" into an "occupation". I want to keep it as a "war". If the losing side gets zerged enough, they stop trying.

On RK2 Clanners have stomped the Ommers down to 0% side XP before. They have also beaten down and taken a decisive majority of the Ommer sites including all in the TL7 or such ranges different times. Yet still they come back at some point. It may take a while but they do and to the point Clan at times have had about 30%-50% the side XP of the Ommers before Clan renewed their push to take tower fields.

With towers it really only takes the will to go out and do it. It also doesn't take all the much at times as at most lvl ranges at this point towers tend to be all offense and little to no defense. Then towers greatly favour the attackers. They can organize groups, get their buffs then go out and maybe return multiple times on their time table within the several hours a site is open. The defenders must hurry to cobble a defense together in time which with how long towers can last against chars of today may not be long at all. Then if they do beat the attackers back they may need to stay on a vigil for the several hours the site is open to protect the remaining towers in case the attackers return. Should the attackers return those that attacked before won't trigger an All Towers message so those outside of the attacked org won't know. It's an uphill battle for the defenders.

If the collective members of an entire side have given up to the point they're not willing to do just that much there's noting FC can really do. Well short of claiming the other side cheated up a storm and throw bans around and then basically tell them they can't defend their sites or suffer more bans. That happened to RK2 Clanners.

VP stuff.

Which is basically the kind of stuff people have been asking for and saying for some three and a half years now. Although anytime people do along comes a small batch of loud people claiming it can't happen as it will kill BSs. Then FC goes and stuffs more VP into BSs.

[Niles]

...there's noting FC can really do. Well short of claiming the other side cheated up a storm and throw bans around and then basically tell them they can't defend their sites or suffer more bans. That happened to RK2 Clanners.

Nice version of it..

[haavarst]

Well short of claiming the other side cheated up a storm and throw bans around and then basically tell them they can't defend their sites or suffer more bans. That happened to RK2 Clanners.

lol...

[-Klod-]

Anyone about to give some head alrdy?