Recent Topics

Ads

City Winner History?

Let's talk about... everything else

Moderators: Developer, Management, Web Developer

User avatar
Kwatchi
Suspended
Posts: 118

Re: City Winner History?

Post#241 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:36 pm

agemennon675 wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:05 pm
Order pug warbands do the same what you dont understand or dont want to understand is there are alot of un-wanted classes on order that even pug 2-2-2's dont want to take aka (SW,WH,Engi,AM) these players are forced to que solo if they want to get crests that is why you are meeting them in the city
This.

You beat up our rejected while we rarely see yours because they can't get a queue due to the population imbalance. Declare us unorganized or not hardcore enough until you are blue in the face if it makes you feel better about it, but those are the facts.

Do you honestly think a organised/comms wb running 8 engies/SW/WH, healed by AMs, would have any shot against even a half-assed premade? Because after the big guilds fill in their 24 that is essentially what is left on the table, along with conq wearing newbies. So they might as well solo queue into a 12 v 12 and get bag rolls for their roflstomp troubles and I can't blame them for it.
Last edited by Kwatchi on Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:57 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Slayer - 40/7x
Archmage - 40/7x

Ads
User avatar
Alfa1986
Posts: 438

Re: City Winner History?

Post#242 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:42 pm

Foofmonger wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:58 pm
One thing I think it's important for everyone to note is: The city design was never supposed to be like it is intentionally.

Initially, Mythic's vision for Warhammer Online was "massive city sieges" a la Forts. However, due to the technology of the time, they just couldn't get it to work. Remember, cities weren't even in the game at launch in 2008.

So, when Mythic finally released the city content, the community back then was very annoyed at the "bait and switch". This content was never supposed to be 24v24 instances, it was supposed to be a "grand epic battle" but Mythic couldn't get their architecture to support this and the 24v24 instances were effectively the best band-aid they could slap onto their City System.

So the city system in this game has never been good. It started out poor and remained poor throughout the lifecycle of the game, and now that the content is re-introduced to this private server, we see the issues with Mythic's original design. As I mentioned above, the devs are trying to think of ways to help alleviate some of Mythic's original design issues (as they have stated), but we should all have a firm understanding of what the city was, what it is, and what it should have been. This city system was never ideal.

I don't see a real problem in the fact that city sieges are made as a scenario 24 * 24, maybe it was worth trying to increase the number to 4 wb or 30 * 30, 36 * 36. but in any case, if the city sieges were done as one big scenario realm vs realm), then there would be much more problems, both with performance server and with balance. I don't understand how at least 150 * 150 people could fit on this map and what they would do there)
Foofmonger wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 3:06 pm
nuadarstark wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 3:04 pm
Foofmonger wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:58 pm
One thing I think it's important for everyone to note is: The city design was never supposed to be like it is intentionally.

Initially, Mythic's vision for Warhammer Online was "massive city sieges" a la Forts. However, due to the technology of the time, they just couldn't get it to work. Remember, cities weren't even in the game at launch in 2008.

So, when Mythic finally released the city content, the community back then was very annoyed at the "bait and switch". This content was never supposed to be 24v24 instances, it was supposed to be a "grand epic battle" but Mythic couldn't get their architecture to support this and the 24v24 instances were effectively the best band-aid they could slap onto their City System.

So the city system in this game has never been good. It started out poor and remained poor throughout the lifecycle of the game, and now that the content is re-introduced to this private server, we see the issues with Mythic's original design. As I mentioned above, the devs are trying to think of ways to help alleviate some of Mythic's original design issues (as they have stated), but we should all have a firm understanding of what the city was, what it is, and what it should have been. This city system was never ideal.
This again is very much the case. That's why we're weeving to bit of a pointless discussion here at this point - the reasonable, measured people who want to stay objective will see the issues, as do the devs from what we saw in the discussion here. The rest here is just flinging mud on the other side, which is not exactly productive.
Indeed, I think we're too worried about balancing a broken system, instead of making the system better/more enjoyable for the playerbase. Making the city more accessible, allowing players to gear up without doing the city, etc... w/e the devs want to do.

It's also an issue with "end game content" in and of itself in the MMO genre. Whatever is the "end game" becomes the "most important" generally speaking. Prior to city, Forts were the most important, so strategies that involved winning forts (of which Order is good at), were dominant. Now, forts are no longer end game and nobody cares about Fort strategies except "how do they lead to the city", i.e. the "real end game". Whenever you place a new "end game" in an MMO, that will become the most important content in the minds of the playerbase, because that's how they can achieve their power fantasies.

that's why it would be much better and smarter to separate the forts and the cities, remove them from one bunch. leave the forts a part of the campaign, and make the city a random event. two bears cannot get along in one den.
15th orks on a dead elf's chest
yo ho ho and a bottle of rum

Foofmonger
Posts: 520

Re: City Winner History?

Post#243 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:58 pm

Fenris78 wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:28 pm
Anyway, when you have literally 25% of a realm's classes that are useless/unwanted in endgame content, the underlying problem is not population distribution or player organisational abilities... and need to be adressed in some fashion BEFORE inciting people to play in a certain way (ie, city sc).

ALL classes should be able to fit, at least remotely, in ANY 2-2-2 composition. If you can't achieve that by balancing toolsets, there will always be severe imbalances impairing fun from players.
Obviously, we can't perfectly mirror and balance everything, so dispredancies and uniqueness should remain to be fun, but it's not desireable to discourage so much people from getting endgame gear, without much side options...

Recent changes on crests drop is helping, but it's IMO not enough to compensate the atrocious experience some classes have to endure in cities.
The issue with this argument is that while it's definitely true, it also applies to Destro (albeit less than Order) we've covered this heavily already in this thread, so at this point this is basically a repost.

To recap:

Order has 5 non-meta classes (IB/SW/Engie/WH/AM), out of those, most WBs will take 1-0 of.
Destro has 4 non-meta classes (BG/Magus/WE/Sham) out of those, most WBs will take 1-0 of.

BGs and Shamans are a "little" more viable than IBs/AMs, as Destroy may run "2" of them in some cases (instead of the 1 for order). So it is accurate that Order has more non-meta classes, it's just not "order has all the non-meta classes", both sides have to deal with a meta and class composition and unwanted classes. However, you cannot forget about class distribution (again a topic we already covered). People have done class distribution data mining that shows that for example, Order has roughly twice the population of Engineers that Destro has Maguses (and has roughly 30-40% less tanks) which will impact the ability to fill proper cities with proper comps. It doesn't matter how strong you buff/make a class, if you can't field 2/2/2 warbands because all you have is DPS players. If there are 12 DPS players for every 8 tanks, that means every Order WB will have an overflow of 4 dps that needs to go pug.

That being said, I think most people here agree (and I agree with you)) that every class should have a spot/niche in the city meta, and the devs have confirmed more or less that this is their philosophy and they are actively working towards it.

Foofmonger
Posts: 520

Re: City Winner History?

Post#244 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:05 pm

Kwatchi wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 4:36 pm
agemennon675 wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 2:05 pm
Order pug warbands do the same what you dont understand or dont want to understand is there are alot of un-wanted classes on order that even pug 2-2-2's dont want to take aka (SW,WH,Engi,AM) these players are forced to que solo if they want to get crests that is why you are meeting them in the city
This.

You beat up our rejected while we rarely see yours because they can't get a queue due to the population imbalance. Declare us unorganized or not hardcore enough until you are blue in the face if it makes you feel better about it, but those are the facts.

Do you honestly think a organised/comms wb running 8 engies/SW/WH, healed by AMs, would have any shot against even a half-assed premade? Because after the big guilds fill in their 24 that is essentially what is left on the table, along with conq wearing newbies. So they might as well solo queue into a 12 v 12 and get bag rolls for their roflstomp troubles and I can't blame them for it.
Do you honestly think a organised/comms wb running 8 maguses/WE healed by Shamans would have any shot against even a half-assed premade (8 MSHs might actually work to be honest).

Cmon man. If destro made horrible comps they'd lose too. This is why you don't see 8 Magus city wbs running around. An 8 magus 8 shaman wb is basically the same level of "**** tier" as an 8 engineer 8 am wb. They're garbage comps and they don't work.

Also remember, how mirrors work in this game. Large engie buffs mean - large Magus buffs. Large WH buffs mean - large WE buffs. Buffing underperforming classes is about buffing the whole mirror archetype, and not just the Order version.

teiloh
Posts: 287

Re: City Winner History?

Post#245 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:06 pm

Bozzax wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 12:02 pm
+20% outgoing ED is the best healer tactic in game (outside of grp clns)
+15% incoming FM kniggit is order only
+5% kniggy crits from DT is order only
+10% IB crits from AF order only (not as common)
+8% SW crits from LS (quite rare)

0.25s RP reduced cast time is (RP, AM) .... mirrored with absorb

But lets not use facts

ED is not the best healer tactic or even the best WP/DoK tactic. It's good, especially at high rank and if you have high survivability vs noob players, but it comes with its costs.

The Knight tactic is nothing special. Good, yes, but it's not exceptional for a tactic slot especially considering Stay Focused is nerfed and basically trash.

As for IB, the BG has Crush the Weak. Not sure if it was changed to -percentage point from -%, close enough. You're not likely to find an IB/Knight/Shadow Warrior/RP setup though.

teiloh
Posts: 287

Re: City Winner History?

Post#246 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:08 pm

emiliorv wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 12:09 pm
its totally false that all the tactics you have to chose have the same weight, and its totally false that dok have any tactic available to increase +20% healing => FALSEEEEEE.
+35 soul essence every 3 secs isnt +20% healing
+160 willp isnt +20% healing
and still, WP have access to that 2 tactics

Im not talking for "order advantage" im talking about WP and DoK and WP is BETTER => have access to better tactics and utility.
+160 Willpower raises healing by 5-11% and also disrupts, and it always works unlike ED which you have to position and spec yourself for. Much less importantly it can't be shattered. The difference between a DoK using Discipline vs WP with ED is not huge.

teiloh
Posts: 287

Re: City Winner History?

Post#247 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:10 pm

Foofmonger wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:05 pm

Cmon man. If destro made horrible comps they'd lose too. This is why you don't see 8 Magus city wbs running around. An 8 magus 8 shaman wb is basically the same level of "**** tier" as an 8 engineer 8 am wb. They're garbage comps and they don't work.

Also remember, how mirrors work in this game. Large engie buffs mean - large Magus buffs. Large WH buffs mean - large WE buffs. Buffing underperforming classes is about buffing the whole mirror archetype, and not just the Order version.
Shaman and Magus are both amazing classes that are flat-out superior to their counterparts, especially in cities, and especially when considering realm synergy. Large Engi buffs should not necessarily mean large Magus buffs. I play both btw.

The fact that Destro believes Magus and Shaman are bad and non-meta classes just goes to show how utterly spoiled Destro is.

emiliorv
Posts: 519

Re: City Winner History?

Post#248 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:26 pm

teiloh wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:08 pm
Spoiler:
emiliorv wrote:
Wed Jul 22, 2020 12:09 pm
its totally false that all the tactics you have to chose have the same weight, and its totally false that dok have any tactic available to increase +20% healing => FALSEEEEEE.
+35 soul essence every 3 secs isnt +20% healing
+160 willp isnt +20% healing
and still, WP have access to that 2 tactics

Im not talking for "order advantage" im talking about WP and DoK and WP is BETTER => have access to better tactics and utility.
+160 Willpower raises healing by 5-11% and also disrupts, and it always works unlike ED which you have to position and spec yourself for. Much less importantly it can't be shattered.
The difference between a DoK using Discipline vs WP with ED is not huge.
the difference is that WP can (and will) slot ED+discipline and that means a real difference.

Ads
User avatar
M0rw47h
Posts: 599

Re: City Winner History?

Post#249 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:43 pm

emiliorv wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:26 pm
the difference is that WP can (and will) slot ED+discipline and that means a real difference.
Wat.
Anathae [KotBS] / Anathea [WP] ( and couple others )
former Anathae [Zealot]

Foofmonger
Posts: 520

Re: City Winner History?

Post#250 » Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:25 pm

M0rw47h wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:43 pm
emiliorv wrote:
Thu Jul 23, 2020 5:26 pm
the difference is that WP can (and will) slot ED+discipline and that means a real difference.
Wat.
What he is saying is:

The WP can slot both ED (which gives 20% healing bonus) and Discipline (160 willpower), giving the WP 25%-31% increased healing (more or less).
The DoK can slot Discipline, giviing them 5-11% increased healing.

Whether or not WPs do slot ED/Discipline, is another matter (and/or whether DOKs slot Discipline).

That being said, acting like 5%-11% healing increases and 20% healing increases "are the same thing", is a delusional take at best. Yes, and also 5% damage is the same as 20% damage! Math!!!!!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], lorok765, teschio86 and 50 guests