Gimpadora Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) When are we going to get a warzone that focuses on killing the other team, with no respawns when zero players are left on the other team, your team wins. Any one else feel this way? I want to see the skill in killing other players, i don't find any joy in standing next to a "node", door, or running a ball. Yea you can kill other players in warzones but that's not the goal of any of these matches. Objective based pvp is extremely boring, especially when cheesey exploits are rampant. Limit the amount and degree of objectives and focus on terrain, strategy, and killing. I want to pvp, not babysit nodes and watch doors or run balls. What we currently have gets old VERY fast. I'd rather be doing a RIFT or a WoW "type" BG over and over again, than what we currently have. Edited March 8, 2012 by Gimpadora Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhovakhiin Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 go play call of duty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparcrypt Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Arena was a terrible blow to WoW PvP. First of all, I love objective based battlegrounds - once arenas came in though, the focus was shifted to arena. The vanilla battlegrounds stayed the only ones for ages, followed by adding either clones of those BG's, or terrible vehicle mechanic based ones... bleh. They never did anything new or interesting - like huttball, which is such an awesome concept for PvP, I love it. Second, pitting teams of players against another just leads you down the road of 'every class is exactly the same'. Again, I point to WoW. At 60, classes were varied, had loads of unique abilities and required very different playstyles. Now? All classes have ability X that does Y but is named Z. Boring. Arenas themselves could be a lot of fun, but I hated what it did to PvP as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RealAeiouy Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 When are we going to get a warzone that focuses on killing the other team, with no respawns when zero players are left on the other team, your team wins. Any one else feel this way? I want to see the skill in killing other players, i don't find any joy in standing next to a "node", door, or running a ball. Yea you can kill other players in warzones but that's not the goal of any of these matches. You want multi player dueling. Can't say inside with you. Objective based pvp is much more complex then multi player dueling. Killing other players is an integral part of all the warzones, so I am not sure about your complaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxNemhauser Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 in theory it seems like a nice idea but honestly- it would become boring and stale very fast most interesting warzones are those that are decided in last moments and you tend to remember them for longer than the next queue pop-up you can't have that in team deathmatch. however the current system is far from perfect.. it is team based but if you are not in organized group - you are sith out of luck. this has to happen: 1) in game voice chat for operations (with the mute functionality of course) 2) map pinging/pointing/drawing (with the clear/ignore functionality of coursre) 3) better matchmaking (so the balance of classes on opposing sides is kept) but that would require going cross-server which is a big no-no for many people Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SannyV Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) BW needs to make a TD styled warzone and when cross server ques come out and you are able to pick what warzone's you want to que up for, either select it or don't. like ffs its not rocket science. you will please both types of communities Edited March 8, 2012 by SannyV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BloodySunBoy Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 To all the people saying go back to COD/Counter strike... those games don't have objective game types do they? seewhatididthere ;3 I pointed out your all idiots :L Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darth__Carnal Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 When are we going to get a warzone that focuses on killing the other team, with no respawns when zero players are left on the other team, your team wins. Any one else feel this way? I want to see the skill in killing other players, i don't find any joy in standing next to a "node", door, or running a ball. Yea you can kill other players in warzones but that's not the goal of any of these matches. I Agree 150% ! I have been wondering when a Single Player Death Match or Team Death Match would be incorporated. Something based on skill that whoever is left standing wins. No respawns. The arena would need to be small to prevent people from running and hiding in some distant corner. Games like RUSTY HEARTS does any excellent job of this concept. My favorite is their Tag Team PvP, where 1 player from each side squares off and the others watch. Once that person is defeated the next player jumps in. Lots of fun ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gibmachine Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Frankly I'm still wondering why they just didn't implement team deathmatch warzone. About 2/3 huttball arena size, couple of pillars, 2 medpacks, 2 expertise bonuses, first team to score 500* frags wins. I understand apparent lack of appeal but myself, when I have horrible streak due to idiot team or something, I just want to smash faces and not care about objectives. * example Edited March 8, 2012 by gibmachine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryotknife Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 To all the people saying go back to COD/Counter strike... those games don't have objective game types do they? seewhatididthere ;3 I pointed out your all idiots :L .... you can choose what game type you want to play..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ComeAndSee Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Objective based war zones aren't always fun if you put your objectives ahead of killing. I always end up using /stuck to kill myself in order to get back to the objectives instead of fighting my way there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryotknife Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 it does getting boring if you are stuck solo defending a door/node that nobody attacks the entire game too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eroex Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 All these people saying GO PLAY A FIRST PERSON SHOOTER have no idea what they are talking about. There are other MMOs with this style of game play that are awesome. The only reason WoW had such a hard time with it was because they focused it around 2v2 and 3v3. In 8v8 like this game is set up for, you wont have that many issues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcgregorya Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 MMO's dont do this because like the other guy said that would be all about gear (not that its not now i guess) FPS is what you want to play, I suggest CoD S&D. Actually, I'd love an option (key word being option) for it when solo queing. Why? Well because I'm sick of having to rely on PuGs. At least if I'm only in it for button mashing my carrying of the entire team can have some impact but when I cap node just to have it lost if god forbid I move away from it to cap another node - well it just becomes pointless. Short answer - sometimes its just nice to be selfish and focus on killing other people instead of having to deal with your failure PuG teamates sucking at handling any of the objectives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eroex Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Arena was a terrible blow to WoW PvP. Second, pitting teams of players against another just leads you down the road of 'every class is exactly the same'. Again, I point to WoW. At 60, classes were varied, had loads of unique abilities and required very different playstyles. Now? All classes have ability X that does Y but is named Z. Boring. So you are blaming something on PVP that raiding caused just as much? 10 man raids, Dont have a shaman? oh well no blood lust for you. Then mages got it, 10 man raids had more options on who to bring. Don't have a paladin? Oh well no kings buff for you, then druids got the same thing. Dont blame every thing on WoW arenas. Blame it on smaller group content as a whole. 10 mans and arenas equally share the burden of ruining wow. They also made wow appealing to tons of people. So its a double edged sword. Edited March 8, 2012 by Eroex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Knockerz Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) There never been a warzone or any thing like that in any other game, except arena and it wasn't successful. I also think your playing the wrong mmorpg or plain playing the wrong game genre. Edited March 8, 2012 by Knockerz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lueckjathom Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I like the objective based Warzones, but I think having one that was closer to a good ol' team deathmatch wouldn't be a bad thing. Even if it had respawns but was timed with number of kills winning the game, or timed but with a kill score that can win it early. Sure gear would play a slightly bigger factor than the other games, but I think it's ok to have that for one warzone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eroex Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 There never been a warzone or any thing like that in any other game, except arena and it wasn't successful. LOL? It was extremely successful. the only problem with it was they focused on 2v2 at first and tried to balance the game around that, when they couldn't they had to do a compromise to with the community. they wanted to balance around 5v5 and larger but 3v3 had become so popular and MLG had picked it up by that time they had to balance around 3v3. So when MLG picks a game up and it is played by millions of people for 5+ years, it wasn't successful? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcgregorya Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Regarding Arena : Arena gear from my understanding was the problem. It was a progression treadmill. There's nothing inherently wrong with deathmatch as an option. Objective based maps are meant to build teamwork but thats not to say a tank and spank isn't fun once in a while too. Edited March 8, 2012 by dcgregorya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eroex Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Gear already is a factor and will be a factor in every warzone especially in rated, so this objection is total nonsense. Skill will always trump gear except at the top brackets, when you are at the top you probably are already geared. At the lower brackets it doesn't matter how geared you are if you are terrible at the game. Im not asking for random pug teams I want it to fall into the rated only. If you don't want to do it, then don't do it. There will still be the other game modes for you. Edited March 8, 2012 by Eroex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigalroe Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 There never been a warzone or any thing like that in any other game, except arena and it wasn't successful. I also think your playing the wrong mmorpg or plain playing the wrong game genre. You obviously never played Warhammer.... The scenarios (warzones) in that game were majority objective based. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasymodeX Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) Want to buy some BATTLE FOR PRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGGG!! Edited March 8, 2012 by EasymodeX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Celebrus Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 (edited) LOL? It was extremely successful. the only problem with it was they focused on 2v2 at first and tried to balance the game around that, when they couldn't they had to do a compromise to with the community. they wanted to balance around 5v5 and larger but 3v3 had become so popular and MLG had picked it up by that time they had to balance around 3v3. So when MLG picks a game up and it is played by millions of people for 5+ years, it wasn't successful? Sorry, but WoW arena has always been a joke of an esport. Never taken seriously. Matt Leinart has been in the NFL for 5+ years. That must make him successful as a NFL quarterback, right? Edited March 8, 2012 by Celebrus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigalroe Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Want to buy some battle for praaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaagggg!! what a great scenario, that or Serpents Passge! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EasymodeX Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Indeed! The Objective-based scenario where the objective is to KILL THE **** OUT OF THE ENEMIES UNTIL THEY DIE. Throw in some *********** MOURKAIN TEMPLE AND LET'S GET THIS PARTY STARTED. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts