What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
I like when the balance of combat allows for multiple objectives at once so that small groups can play a role in the larger PvP without needing to pile into one huge battle. For me, nothing feels cooler than the fantasy being able to be off in an unguarded enemy tower and breaking some crystal that buffs my army and helps turn the tide in an otherwise massive battle.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I am primarily an artisan/crafting player. I am not sure if I would really be in a position or have the motivation to declare war... except if the other node has rare materials... I would march to war in an instant for rare crafting materials.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
For actual siege related wars, I think fantasy siege engines (including giant war beasts) are a must. For wars in general, I am a big fan of PvPvE style content where two or more groups are at war over some sort of PvE objective like a boss monster, a king of the hill style environmental effect, the enchanted bandit slaying in the monthly showcase, etc.
I LOVED what I saw in the Node war Showcase, and that Mayors have special buffs to lead his/her troops to battle, to participate alongside their fellow players instead of chilling back at the town, which I guess they have that option too, but I think players would disapprove, as a single buff can change the course of battle...kind of like Warhammer Total war now that I think about it lol.
In terms of sieges, I like what Elixor said. I dont want player communities to lose EVERYTHING. Their town, their stuff, all of it. I would rather have them keep the main nodes hub once it reaches the second stage of Node developement. So when you go for a Node war, you are competing for the outlying towns that separate the two main hubs. So that when the war is concluded, whoever the losing side is can either try to fight another way to get certain resources back, or look to other areas to build on.
I am interested to see if Intrepid could have a wider scope version of what we saw in the showcase with a nodes allied kingdom being requested to join in the war effort, and the enemy node's allies can do the same, having a 2v2 faction node war, or 3v3, making for some very massive battles, and coordinating on objectives. Which would depend on the servers of course, and how many nodes have trade relations/alliances/vassal kingdoms. (I dont know in what capacity we could have these yet. Just theorizing here)
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
Communication systems at-a-glance would be important for me. Map or Mini-Map "pings" being available to leaders of a war/siege roster could help here.
(Defend Here//Move Here//Siege Here/Setup Here//Gather Forces) Perhaps an opinion that might not align with everyone.
These have been great assets in games like Hell Let Loose where a lot of VOIP is being utilized in tandem with these visual communications for mass coordination.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Considering how much gathering and crafting plays a part in Verra, these will be the biggest factors. Temporary buffs to gathered materials or access to higher loot drops from the nodes' dungeons perhaps.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Dynamic changes to the structure of a siege based on the siege location. One tactic for a siege, defensive and offensive, should work in one or two locations alone.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike? I like it when the focus is on the PvP and not PvE for a PvP event, i remember Bori from Age of Conan where resource gathering was basicly the objektive and it felt realy bad and boring as hell turned in to a serg fest.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game? Revenge, change, or just for the gigels.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges? Clear and defined objectives and win conditions. With a focus on killing the enemy. Also it is not a Siege with out siege weapons. Catapults and Balistas.
All PvP content should be available to everyone.
Not just large guilds.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
My feedback for this is both 'too long' and 'probably not applicable to Ashes' as far as I've seen. Might edit depending on a different thread.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Breach of contract/agreement, alliance with another group that benefits from 'my group' being the one to declare it, general ingame philosophical disagreements with no chance of negotiation. If wars are short, singular events, or only last 2 days, my 'honor' forces me to be a lot more lenient with the aforementioned. Wars of 3 days or more mean I will do it more often. Sieges depend on Economic factors on both sides.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
A proper implementation of the channeling/control point mechanic. The following is an example of what I mean, it may not fit Ashes, possible that it doesn't fit at all, but I'll still explain it as if it was in Ashes. This is not 'what I want to see', this is 'a random thing I came up with as an example of what might be interesting in some game'.
"When channeling the control point, there is a set area, a circle, in which you stand, and activate the 'skill' to do so. All allied members in that circle accumulate some amount of progress per second/tick. If a given player is killed by the enemy, their accumulated 'channeling power' is spread out to all others in their group in the circle who are currently also channeling. If they experience hard CC or are pulled/pushed out of the circle somehow, their channeling progress is instead lost. Channeling has at least 2s of startup time." (depending on the game/classes/abilities, maybe some could still use things like self heals or summons while channeling)
I find the 'one person is trying to do the thing, kill them, then kill the next one that tries, while PvP is just happening everywhere', pretty unsatisfying in games with certain combat designs. I like when the system matches the game's combat design. I don't think the simple 'One Person Channels The Point' is a system that matches MMORPG combat designs, personally (I also don't like 'deliver these things to this spot over time' but that one admittedly works, I just don't like it).
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
I like the whole strategy part, where it's not just about who has better/stronger players, but who is better at navigation around the terrain, flanking opponents, holding chokepoints, creating ambushes. A big part of this is also who has a better leader, with a group that's actually able to follow commands.
In Archeage, it was always possible to demolish a much larger group, with a small-coordinated group that knew what it was doing.
Terrain is a big part of this; hills, chokepoints, rivers, are all important, and could be utilized differently in order to gain advantage.
Definitely allow players to zoom out a bit more, in order to be able to actually see the battlefield.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Usually depends on who is holding the node/castle. If they're assholes, if they PK a lot, if they are a general nuisance for everyone, then I'd gladly declare on them.
It could also be dependent on resources. If some group is holding a very important resource for example, that your group just needs for whatever reason.
Now other than actual node and castle sieges, which should be very big events, that don't just happen every few days, we should also just be able to dominion guilds, and just have random PvP out in the world, where the goal is simply to win by killing more opponents. (Just like in Archeage, it was always fun to just flag on a guild, especially if they were running packs). Again, same things apply here, I wouldn't just flag on any guild, but only on those guilds that are considered as "enemies", toxic, known PKers, etc.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Initiator classes/abilities, and synergies.
Since there will be massive pvp, we need some specs to be able to focus on "engaging", having gap-closer abilities, AoE cc, pulls, etc. We also need specs that can follow-up, with lots of AoE damage.
At the same time, classes that maybe focus more on single target damage, and mobility, shouldn't feel useless. They should be able to flank, and pick off stragglers, scout ahead, etc.
All classes/specs should have a use in mass PvP settings, whether it's for buffs, heals, engaging, ccing, AoE damage, or nuking single targets.
Synergies between some abilities, like shown previously in updates, are also important. Maybe the engagers can pull in a group of people, but to lock them down, you need to synergize with a few AoEs from different people/classes, in order to actually lock them down. Engager shouldn't be able to do everything by themselves, but only with good synergy, and timing from your teammates.
I feel like this will make it so that a well coordinated group will always be better than just a large zerg that doesn't really know what they're doing.
And yeah, castle sieges for guilds only, node sieges for everyone. Castle sieges shouldn't have as many players as node sieges, anything more than 100 is honestly too much already.
For wars/dominions, make it a bit more interesting than just killing the other side. Objectives, dynamic events that pop up, PvE should also be incorporated in some way.
And for the love of god, add pings. Not just map pings, but actual markers that you see in the world. This way, you can actually tell everyone where to go, where to stand, etc. in a much easier and more visible way.
- Numbers < strategy/skills
- The terrain prevents regrouping and forces the group to split up (but plains are good too ^^)
- PVE objective < PVP
- Death counts, not in terms of xp but in terms of movement, you respawn far from battlefield
What would motivate me to declare a nod war:
- A nod's vassal missions/pays me to destroy its parent
- I declare war on a nod to be able to block a zone/spot/boss in that nod without the inconvenience of corruption.
- To change the type of nod
- The nod doesn't take care of its territory, for example a nod doesn't kill its goblins, so they come to my home and steal all the wood?
- 2 nod are close in terms of xp for lvl up, I attack one of them to slow it down.
- Revenge because of an "illegal" caravan/farm attack on my territory/treason.
- Influence of the nod's majority guild too great
The must-have:
- AN OPEN WORLD, it's an mmo, you have to play with others, discuss, take revenge, pay, negotiate, for something as important as a castle/nod, the strongest AND/OR most influential guild/alliance has to win. For competition between guilds, set up a guild arena with cosmetic rewards.
- A long respawn or a distant respawn, also making the rez important.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
I personally would like to see siege equipment be part of the caravan system. Rather than keeping entire trebuchets in your backpack to be deployed anywhere within seconds, require them to be crafted at your home node and transported to the battlefield.
This would create lots of opportunities for player decisions and counterplay. Do you bring the trebs on the initial assault and try to blitz the castle? Do you send a forward group to lock down the castle and bring the trebs after? As the defenders, do you risk resources and time by going out in the field and trying to sabotage the enemy siege before it arrives? Or do you fortify your own defenses?
I wish we get similar Epic boss system as Lineage II had where we used to pvp for hours before boss spawned and where everyone was welcome, regardless of their gear and lvl. You could bring lvl1 characters to mass pvp and use rez scroll to on healers who had aoe rez skill and change the entire fight. If you had friends who had bad PC or just wasnt good enough to play dps classes, they could still come and make an impact with classes who focused on buffing others characters.
The biggest enemy was usually insane LAG with 400+ players on the screen. The second biggest issue was dealing with whales and big zerg Alliances, because it was hard to play as underdog with worse gear and smaller numbers, so most players tried to join the strongest force on the server. Imo we need some kind of feature which make it harder to occupy specific node / castle for extended period of time. For example if Alliance "A" successfully defend the first siege, then next siege attacking side will get some kind of buff that boost their stats while they remain in siege zone. This will make siege a lot more balanced and interesting in the long period of time and server might not become totally one sided after several weeks.
Also pls add L2 guild war syste where If number of guild meembers is higher than "X" you can declare war on them and if they accept, both become flagged for pvp everywhere, except the towns.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
Likes:
-Strong Area Effect abilities available to a variety of classes and AE/Anti-zerg builds. Most MMOs have reduced AE effectiveness if a certain number of enemies are hit. I would like that removed/excluded from Ashes and possibly have some abilities that become stronger the more enemies impacted.
-Area denial abilities like the red wall in the showcase, and directional barriers with durability like Sigma, Brigitte and Reinhardt shields in Overwatch, Jarvan's ultimate Cataclysm, Anivia's Ice wall, Braum's shield, Yasuo's wind wall, and Camille's ultimate in League of Legends.
-Map design that discourages and limits Zerg strength by having various choke points within terrain and war objectives.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Node advancement, territory control, resources, node/guild/alliance drama, maybe people just wanna PvP?
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
-Participant caps based on Node level (Higher level node = higher player capacity)
-Siege cooldown of at least 24 hours on the node, and a separate cooldown on using Siege Scrolls per node structure/guild/alliance
-Destructible Walls and Structures
-Extended respawn timers making kills more meaningful for both sides and preventing everlasting fights due to respawned players constantly trickling back in. Also places importance on healer's resurrecting.
-A planning stage once both sides have loaded into the Siege (5-10 mins)
-Multiple stages of a Siege that look something like this:
1. Breach the outer walls via siege equipment (Rams, Siege towers, trebuchets, catapults, etc.) or infiltration
2. Capture multiple points on the wall such as a gatehouse, towers or just specific sections.
3. Loot/Destroy x buildings, buildings of importance and/or get X amount of kills
4. Capture and hold multiple points of interest within the node like the Market, Town Square, Cathedral, etc.
5. Defeat the remaining enemies (limited respawn tickets for Defenders), kill the mayor (VIP objective), or raise your banner over the town hall before the timer runs out (capture and hold while the nodes banner is lowered and yours is raised).
Completing each stage adds time to the clock for attackers and each stage completed by the attackers determines the level of damage to the node, whether it is de-leveled, demolished, or outright conquered.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike? Dislike
* unbalanced spawn points (e.g. spawn point allowing enemy team return to the boss location too fast after wipe - a lot of such examples in Archeage, wipe and respawn must be punishing or become mindless zerg spam too easly; on the other hand AA Kraken felt quite nice in that matter having better balance between giving time for PvE for winning side, but also some potential chances for second chance come back for loosing one than most of other events in AA, mainly because of boss distance from spawnpoints; L2 had that nicely done on castle sieges and most world bosses as well; In L2 castle siege it was designed that defenders were respawning fast, but attackers could destroy crystals inside castle's areas to slow it down significantly, while on the other side attackers had a very long path to the castle after respawn, but attacking guild could spent some materials to create a respawn flag closer to the castle - I think those are design tricks that could be very beneficial if balanced correctly)
* artificial AoE downscaling (e.g. fireball can dmg only 5 people beside the fact that it actually hit 50)
Like (quality of life)
* notifications about war kills from L2 (whole guild seeing messages "player X killed player Y from guild A") were nice
* party target markers (marking enemy as star for easier cooperation); perfectly separated from raid markers to keep party identity and team cohesion within raid itsself
* assist function, to coordinate targeting
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Primarely benefits or conflicting interests, profitable control of the castle or competing with other guild to kill rare boss for loot, but also some less obvious such as honor motivation. (e.g. other guild members killed our buddies during caravan run)
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
* logical win condition (good example is L2 castle win condition was to cast special channeling skill in throne room for 5 minutes which had to be preceded by cutting your way on the battlefield; bad example are points given by artifical activities loosely connected to the actual purpose)
* high variety of destructive objectives like gates/walls and the toolsets required to be prepared (perfectly with required gold/materials investment, so the attackers will have their risk as well) before/during siege to use against them
* after seeing flying mounts on Node preview -> the same or even more for castle owner
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
I would like a hot-streak feature, that gives additional risk and reward to players who rack up a lot of kills without dying. It should provide some kind of small damage or mobility buff so you can hard-carry when you're on a hot streak. But it should also give a commensurate reward for the opponent if they manage to take you down. And some kind of marker should identify you (to allies and opponents) that you're on a hotstreak, both for the sake of glory and as part of the risk.
Those kinds of systems make large, chaotic battles more exciting for solo players, since it gives them a personal goal to chase (even if their team is currently floundering). And it can also provide a bit of strategic depth if the teams work to play around (or focus-target) the current "carries" who are hot-streaking.
As for dislikes, I don't think there's anything I would complain about that's not obvious. As long as it's chaotic, I'll be having fun. So uh, just make sure there aren't frequent stalemates, I guess. Occasionally, an evenly-matched battle (with no victor) might be cool, but obviously that shouldn't be the norm.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I'm too nice; I wouldn't declare war on anyone unless they did so first or they harassed me or my allies for a long while. Good question for someone else.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Varied stages of fighting, some that are stalled-out around choke-points (assuming the defenders are defending properly), and some with more open and fluid warfare (similar to the resource-gathering phase from the node wars preview).
I'd like to add two points to my previous post. Firstly, and most importantly, having target markers is essential for massive PvP content. It would be highly appreciated to have this feature available at the start of A2.
Secondly, to enhance overall PvP engagement during wars and sieges and to allow players to practice and prepare, a basic dueling system should also be available at the start of A2.This would allow players to fully test the combat system quickly and easily, outside of PvP events.
For the duel mechanics, it would be appreciated if the system could accommodate both 1v1 and group vs. group formats. Additionally, implementing a separate HP bar for duels, or restoring players' HP to its previous status upon the duel ending, being canceled, or interrupted, would be beneficial. This way, players wouldn't have to rely on potions to heal after each duel.
- What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
- What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
- Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
I entered these questions in ChatGPT and agree with the output.
Systems and Features in Mass PvP Combat: Likes and Dislikes
Likes:
Large-scale Battles:
Enjoyment of participating in battles with hundreds or thousands of players, where coordination and strategy are crucial.
Siege Mechanics:
Use of siege weapons like trebuchets, ballistae, and battering rams adds depth and variety to combat.
Tactical Elements:
Importance of terrain, fortifications, and positioning. Features like walls that can be breached and gates that can be destroyed enhance the tactical complexity.
Role Diversity:
Different roles for players (e.g., infantry, cavalry, archers, siege engineers) ensure that everyone has a purpose and can contribute in unique ways.
Reward Systems:
Meaningful rewards for participation and victory, including loot, titles, and in-game currency, provide motivation and a sense of accomplishment.
Dislikes:
Lag and Performance Issues:
Server lag and performance drops during large battles can be frustrating and disrupt the experience.
Zerg Tactics:
Dislike of "zerg" tactics where sheer numbers overwhelm strategy, making individual skill and planning less important.
Unbalanced Factions:
Imbalance between factions or teams can lead to one-sided battles, reducing enjoyment and competitiveness.
Poor Communication Tools:
Lack of effective in-game communication and coordination tools can hinder teamwork and strategic planning.
Respawn and Travel Times:
Long respawn times or having to travel great distances to get back into the fight can be discouraging.
Motivation to Declare a Siege or War
Territorial Control:
Desire to control strategic locations, resources, or territory that provides significant in-game advantages.
Guild Prestige:
Enhancing the prestige and reputation of one's guild or faction through successful conquests.
Resource Acquisition:
Access to valuable resources or loot that can be gained from successful sieges.
Revenge or Rivalry:
Personal or guild vendettas and rivalries with other players or groups can be a strong motivator.
Event Participation:
Participation in special events or campaigns organized by the game or player community that involve mass PvP.
Must-Haves in Sieges
Strategic Depth:
Diverse and complex strategies that allow for different approaches to sieges, including sneaky tactics, sabotage, and diplomacy.
Balanced Mechanics:
Ensuring that both attackers and defenders have viable strategies and tools, preventing one side from having an overwhelming advantage.
Reward Systems:
Meaningful rewards that incentivize participation and contribute to long-term progression.
Dynamic Environments:
Interactive and destructible environments that add realism and tactical options.
Player Contributions:
Systems that allow players to contribute to the war effort beyond just combat, such as crafting siege weapons, building defenses, and gathering intelligence.
In-Game Communication Tools:
Robust communication tools to facilitate coordination and strategy among large groups of players.
Epic Scale:
Maintaining an epic scale and feel, with impressive visuals, sound effects, and immersive elements that make the battle feel significant.
Balanced Population:
Mechanisms to ensure population balance between factions to prevent one-sided battles.
By addressing these aspects, a PvP MMO can create a more engaging, balanced, and rewarding experience for players involved in mass PvP combat.
Systems in Mass PvP Combat: Preferences, Motivations, and Must-Haves
Map and Terrain
A well-designed map and terrain are crucial for mass PvP combat, setting the stage for strategic gameplay. Effective use of geometry, chokepoints, and positional advantages can significantly enhance the experience of mass PvP and siege warfare. A prime example is Conqueror's Blade, which features cities with large walls, extensive streets, numerous buildings, and segmented objectives, creating dynamic battlegrounds for both attackers and defenders.
Destructible Assets
Destructible assets are a vital component of siege warfare, as seen in games like Conqueror's Blade, Darkfall, Darkfall Unholy Wars, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, and Elder Scrolls Online. This feature adds a cost element to assets, encouraging players to protect their property while making attackers carefully plan their sieges. In Darkfall, for instance, everything can be destroyed, emphasizing the importance of strategic asset management and protection. This mechanic can be expanded to involve all levels of a siege, including logistical supply lines and civil engineering, catering to players who prefer non-combat roles.
Siege Vehicles, Weaponry, and Equipment
Effective siege warfare requires well-thought-out siege vehicles, weaponry, and equipment. While some games like ArcheAge and Guild Wars 2 have implemented these systems, they often lack depth. Conqueror's Blade, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, and Elder Scrolls Online have notable examples of diverse and unique siege weaponry. Darkfall introduced siege hammers, which could be developed further into a system of multiple tools for repairing different parts of a node. Additionally, Darkfall’s siege spikes (asset grenades) provide an interesting mechanic for breaking down walls without harming players. Expanding on the Sapper/Combat Engineer playstyle could attract players interested in small-scale operations, spying, scouting, and subterfuge. Integrating these systems with the game's economy and logistics would enhance player participation, especially for non-combatant roles.
Declaring War: Economics, Logistics, Politics, and Spite
Economic and logistical reasons are among the most compelling motivations for declaring war. In a game like Ashes of Creation, built around scarcity, these factors will naturally drive conflict. Scarcity of materials and the challenge of finding and farming rare mobs will lead players to compete for high-tier areas and form alliances to control them. Political dynamics will evolve from these economic and logistical foundations, with resource scarcity driving alliances and conflicts. Additionally, spite—stemming from personal grievances, insults, or dislikes—plays a significant role in player-driven drama and conflict, further motivating wars and sieges.
Territory Control
Territory control has been present in games like Conqueror's Blade, Darkfall, and ArcheAge, but often in a limited form. Effective territory control should offer distinct advantages and tie into the other systems mentioned. Sid Meier's Civilization system is a good model, providing a framework for further conflict and fueling node wars and sieges.
Diverse Class and Weapon Kits
Diverse classes and weapon kits are essential for engaging and varied combat. Drawing inspiration from a wide range of games, including MOBAs, can provide players with unique abilities and tactical options. These diverse kits can enhance ground utility and make combat more dynamic and interesting.
Conclusion
In summary, the best systems in mass PvP combat include well-designed maps and terrain, destructible assets, and comprehensive siege vehicles, weaponry, and equipment. Motivations for declaring war should include economic and logistical factors, political dynamics, and personal grievances. Effective territory control and diverse class and weapon kits are also crucial for creating a compelling and engaging PvP environment.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
I like to have decent Siege Weapons, some for attacking cities and some for attacking players; Fun group synergies, but also the ability to play as a solo if required if your friends aren't online; Clear and precise objectives for what constitutes a win; Skills that don't just become wet sponges when you use them in PvP cos you were just fighting a PvE encounter - it sucks having to keep changing skills and gear between PvP and PvE encounters.
I don't like when people have those niche builds that make them unkillable even when there are twenty enemies all hitting them at once. Please take this into account when designing your Skills and Gear!
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Absolutely anything.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
See Likes section above.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
I like when there are mechanics in place that encourage players to work together. Siege engines requiring a team to push them, the ability to form shield walls with other players, massive spells that require a full party of wizards to work together in order to cast, etc. etc.
I dislike when UI and VFX clutter up the screen so much that large battles end up looking more like two Excel spreadsheets bumping into each other. I especially dislike it when this ends up being the most optimal way to play.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I plan to leave that to the mayors/guild leaders. My aspirations begin and end with being a grunt in someone else's army.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
This is mostly an aesthetic thing, but lots of heraldry should be present to mark out either side of the conflict. These wars shouldn't look like random skirmishes between hodge-podge bands of high fantasy misfits, they should look like two opposing armies. This could be as simple as a standardized node cape, like we saw in the stream, all the way up to full sets of armor and banners that can be carried into battle.
2
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
edited June 6
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
Liked:
Destructible walls in Elder Scrolls Online castles; more dynamic implementation would be great.
Escape doors in castle walls that are only usable in one direction by defenders.
Disliked:
Bugs like in Lineage 2 where players could shoot through walls; hope to avoid similar issues.
Bugs like in Lineage 2 where players could dropped worthless items en-mass to slow the server down.. ie 100 players dropped 100 individual arrows each.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Financial gain for the guild.
Expanding guild territory.
Access to a limited boss
Payback for another guild taking a boss from us.
Expanding our empire.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Not sure about specific must-haves, but drawing inspiration from Lineage 2, Mount & Blade, ESL, and Chivalry would be great.
Some variance for siege time (not everyone on the sever will be playing in their exact time zone)
Desired siege equipment includes:
Battering Rams
Siege Towers (both regular and fantasy, like in Throne & Liberty)
Catapults
Ballistas
Siege Cannons
Castle wall ladders
Boiling water cauldrons
Droppable boulders
Additional Requests:
Greater distance for elevated shooting from parapets and castle walls.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
Proper environmental design that allows for tactical troop movements, baits, ambushes, etc. Tight corridors and small rooms are a must as well.
Good zoom out on the camera, so that leaders and shotcallers can see more of the battlefield.
A variety of aoe effects, designed with both - static and scaling effects. Imo dmg should always be static (because the ability already hits several people at the same time), while different effects (i.e. debuffs) should scale based on the amount of people effected.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Pretty much anything from "I just wanted to" to "there's a super complex diplomatic reason, that will have long-lasting consequences for the entire server".
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
I already mentioned tight spaces (chokepoints).
We'll already have tasks for smaller groups of players to do during the sieges, so that's a must-have that's already in.
Good positioning and anti-positioning abilities. The tank wall from the last showcase is one of the best/biggest examples of that. Loved that one.
Huge synergistic abilities that require several characters of the same archetype to work in unison to pull off. We supposedly already have those planned for the game as well, so that's great.
And probably the most important thing imo - ways for uninvolved people to watch the siege. Sieges will be a rare thing (relatively speaking), so casual players who'll never have the ability to participate should at least be able to witness it and watch it live. In the most ideal situation the viewing spots would get added according to the progress of the siege, so that initial battle tactics don't get uncovered as easily by either side.
So spectator "cameras" might start at initial spawn points of the attackers and overseeing the courtyard of the castle/node (overlooking both sides of the walls). Then, if the attackers break through the outer walls, the cameras from the inside the courtyard would get added, to better see the action. Then internal cameras, then the throne/casting room cameras.
Watching sieges was a very nice pastime back in L2, and with AoC's sieges being instanced (potentially even the node ones) - the only way to see the siege would be these "cameras". And while streamers will obviously show the siege from their pov, I'd assume that'll be on a delay and would obviously be limited to only a single pov, which defeats the point of the spectacle of the event. And with sieges being one of the peak pvp events in the game, I think that drawing people in with "bread and circuses" would be a good way to keep the game in people's minds.
Those cameras would also allow some streamers to commentate the sieges that they're not part of, which would also be a nice ad for the game
Lots of awesome feedback to unpack here. Thank you!
Follow-up question for ya. Are the "tight corridors and small rooms" the only suggestions you'd have for tactical environmental design? Do you have any examples you'd like to provide as well?
Follow-up question for ya. Are the "tight corridors and small rooms" the only suggestions you'd have for tactical environmental design? Do you have any examples you'd like to provide as well?
Definitely need good verticality and corners too.
This would probably be the easiest and quickest example of what I love, except for maybe the absence of good verticality (even though it shows a bit of a staircase near the end). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ArHi27jcXck
This particular case was in a circular tower, so not quite a straight thin corridor, but the core of my preference is there. Places to ambush enemies. A place that doesn't fully benefit ranged characters, but they can still excel in it. A place that promotes constant movement, cause you can be pushed out of your ambushing corner.
Steven played L2 so he knows all of this. So, as usually, my example is "L2 is good "
I'd like to add two points to my previous post. Firstly, and most importantly, having target markers is essential for massive PvP content. It would be highly appreciated to have this feature available at the start of A2.
Secondly, to enhance overall PvP engagement during wars and sieges and to allow players to practice and prepare, a basic dueling system should also be available at the start of A2.This would allow players to fully test the combat system quickly and easily, outside of PvP events.
For the duel mechanics, it would be appreciated if the system could accommodate both 1v1 and group vs. group formats. Additionally, implementing a separate HP bar for duels, or restoring players' HP to its previous status upon the duel ending, being canceled, or interrupted, would be beneficial. This way, players wouldn't have to rely on potions to heal after each duel.
100% this.
We need to really be able to test the pvp without wasting a lot of time in between tests.
Related to the follow-up question for @NiKr , I have a general question for those here:
What are some key aspects of environmental design that enhance mass PvP combat to you?
Well since we have breakable objects in the open world, we could use things like barricades that can be dps'd down to open up flanks.
Or wooden towers that rangers/mages can use to get high ground but can be broken with enough dps.
The climbable/jump puzzle walls that we saw in the showcase were cool. One thing I don't recall seeing is when a fighter air-charges to a ranger who is at the edge of a skinny wall. Do they just fall down because there is no wall to clip onto? Would this work any time that a character is at the edge of a wall or cliff, but if they accidentally take a step back then the fighter clips onto the cliff and stays?
We also seem to have a pretty cool water system in this game, might as well use that too. Moats, rivers, ponds, lakes.
Not sure if there are swamp type mechanics (movement impairing zones), but those could also be used.
Also, could you imagine if Tumok spawned in the middle of a node war? LOL that would be funny.
1
Options
ApokMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Objective gameplay.
In shooters like BF Bad company and UT2004 they had objective modes you could capture and move forward after that point which I always liked and thought it would be cool to see implemented in a MMORPG. Basically one team is on offense and the other is on defense, once the offense takes the point the defenders spawn becomes the offenses spawn and they do that a few times.
In NW when you're at war you deal with playing king of the hill on 3 points then run through a door to play king of the hill again. Almost all of the fighting takes place in an open field which is kinda boring.
My idea would be to create an instanced area for players one being on defense and the other on offense. Offense has to capture 4 spawns before the match ends with each capture being harder for the offense to take a point with how you design the area. Balance it out so the attackers have the advantage on the first two and more of a disadvantage on the next two using things like choke points, like of sight, ramps, ladders, and height advantages to change the difficulty
dynamic gameplay
before they made planetside the dev team worked on infantry online, I loved that game it had many modes but my favorite was CTF extreme and supported random teams in a large map with 4 neutral flags that had to be grabbed and the game didn't end till one team held all 4 or the timer ran out which ran for hours from what I remember. There was large public and private teams out there all going at it on this big map.
this would be awesome to see multiple guilds going into a map and battling it out like how infantry had multiple teams playing at once on a large scale map. You could also do it so when you join you're on a public team and can switch teams, guilds would create private teams and can use this feature to pull in people from public teams and possibly recruit new members.
Public teams having strength in numbers where the guilds would be more refined and use better teamwork would lead to some interesting gameplay.
other than that I haven't seen to much PvP in MMOs where I thought the design was amazing, the fun just comes from the actual player interaction usually.
New World tried with OPR giving PvE players something to do and a boss you kill to freeze the other teams clock, it's kinda fun but it's still just zerg this and zerg that. You can keep doing zergfests but something about dropping hundreds of people into a sandbox and telling them they have to hold all 4 of these flags that are out there would just be so chaotic, I would love it so much.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
I like zerg-play in the sense that its massive groups of people clashing, where battlefield tactics win the day, and not the mindless zerging where nothing happens other than people staring at each other at max range and occasionally pew-pewing a bit. Coordinated groups rolling the enemy zerg's back-line, while your own zerg holds the front. Or groups of tanks and fighters crashing into the enemy frontline in a coordinated attack, making a hole and causing disruption. Like a controlled chaos kind of thing, but still with several hundred people going head to head in a big battle.
Add war-machines or group-mounts that are hard to kill and can help make holes in the line, or fast enough for flanking maneuvers. Some of the big Planetside 1 and 2 battles were amazing. It shouldn't just be people on foot.
I am not a fan of spectator mode at all. Please never add that. It kills a lot of the tactics you can do with fog of war.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
If they are fun, that's enough. Sure, there is politics and all that, but if you make the sieges and wars fun enough, that's really the be-all and end-all of it.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Super well-polished siege weapon gameplay. Big trebuchets, ballistas to kill the trebuchets, counter-weapons to kill those ballistas. Strong, covered battering rams, oil and big rocks falling on those rams. Siege towers! And again, please make them polished and non-clunky and intuitive to use.
Switching out some siege weapons with things like summoned siege golems and such are perfectly good ideas.
We won't be getting sappers for tunnelling as I understand it, but I would like to see tunnel warfare in existing tunnels at least, so the fighting is happening both above and below ground.
* Aoe damage that matters (rain of fire in WoW bad, brimstone staff from albion good. Need some oomf in the aoe).
* Need mechanics to help melee range characters to exist without getting shredded by ambient damage.
* Supports! Not just buff/mana bots. Stuff like the wall and tank shield you have are good starts
* Anti-RMT (real money transaction) systems. If being in charge of stuff gets you in game money, people will abuse it. Even if they aren't doing it actively whole they play they will do it when they quit to 'cash out'.
* Anti-'handholding' systems. Players will go to great lengths to win, and win easily. For example, if it is costly to go to war and being in charge passively generates income, those in charge of nodes will at some point agree to handhold with each other and never fight. Especially when combined with some good old RMT.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
Recently experienced probably the first mass pvp combat I did not like. And it was in TaL, it was confusing at best. There was seemingly very little guidance on what an objective was in this pvp. I had gotten a notification to go to a location where a world boss would spawn it initiated a 10 minute or so open ffa pvp zone which was fun while waiting for the boss to spawn but once the boss had spawned I assumed the objective would be to kill the boss. However, there were some people who did not even attack the boss and only killed players. I had no idea what the objective actually was and there was little to no guidance on what players should actually be trying to achieve. I got warnings when I would go to attack other players letting me know it would flag me so I wouldn't attack and then I would get attacked a few seconds later. It was the most unenjoyable pvp I've ever been apart of and if I were to continue playing I would have just never attended another event like this because of how chaotic it was in its direction of goals.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I am not sure at this point. I would need to see what in game feels like.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
The one aspect I felt this stream was missing was the lack of utilizing crafters in sieges and node wars. I understand that maybe the systems are not ready for this but I would have like to have heard plans of this coming in the future.
I definitely want to see wood working crafters on the front lines building siege weapons, I want to see gatherers bringing their best farmed lumber, etc. Or specific node war/siege caravans or small carts bringing materials to those front lines. Allowing for further disruption of battle as well. It would also be something for people who know they are being attacked to have a short period to build up makeshift walls to help bottle neck key locations in the battle or protect weak locations, etc. Attackers might arrive to the battle to find these defensive structures and target them to destroy them as apart of the fight.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
For them NOT to be instanced (as I've heard that was the plan). It would give a "The Ride of the Rohirrim
" scenario no chance to happen at the last minute of the siege and to make a turn of a tide and that is a big deal especially for a political community driven open world MMO
Comments
I like when the balance of combat allows for multiple objectives at once so that small groups can play a role in the larger PvP without needing to pile into one huge battle. For me, nothing feels cooler than the fantasy being able to be off in an unguarded enemy tower and breaking some crystal that buffs my army and helps turn the tide in an otherwise massive battle.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I am primarily an artisan/crafting player. I am not sure if I would really be in a position or have the motivation to declare war... except if the other node has rare materials... I would march to war in an instant for rare crafting materials.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
For actual siege related wars, I think fantasy siege engines (including giant war beasts) are a must. For wars in general, I am a big fan of PvPvE style content where two or more groups are at war over some sort of PvE objective like a boss monster, a king of the hill style environmental effect, the enchanted bandit slaying in the monthly showcase, etc.
In terms of sieges, I like what Elixor said. I dont want player communities to lose EVERYTHING. Their town, their stuff, all of it. I would rather have them keep the main nodes hub once it reaches the second stage of Node developement. So when you go for a Node war, you are competing for the outlying towns that separate the two main hubs. So that when the war is concluded, whoever the losing side is can either try to fight another way to get certain resources back, or look to other areas to build on.
I am interested to see if Intrepid could have a wider scope version of what we saw in the showcase with a nodes allied kingdom being requested to join in the war effort, and the enemy node's allies can do the same, having a 2v2 faction node war, or 3v3, making for some very massive battles, and coordinating on objectives. Which would depend on the servers of course, and how many nodes have trade relations/alliances/vassal kingdoms. (I dont know in what capacity we could have these yet. Just theorizing here)
Communication systems at-a-glance would be important for me. Map or Mini-Map "pings" being available to leaders of a war/siege roster could help here.
(Defend Here//Move Here//Siege Here/Setup Here//Gather Forces) Perhaps an opinion that might not align with everyone.
These have been great assets in games like Hell Let Loose where a lot of VOIP is being utilized in tandem with these visual communications for mass coordination.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Considering how much gathering and crafting plays a part in Verra, these will be the biggest factors. Temporary buffs to gathered materials or access to higher loot drops from the nodes' dungeons perhaps.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Dynamic changes to the structure of a siege based on the siege location. One tactic for a siege, defensive and offensive, should work in one or two locations alone.
I like it when the focus is on the PvP and not PvE for a PvP event, i remember Bori from Age of Conan where resource gathering was basicly the objektive and it felt realy bad and boring as hell turned in to a serg fest.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Revenge, change, or just for the gigels.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Clear and defined objectives and win conditions. With a focus on killing the enemy. Also it is not a Siege with out siege weapons. Catapults and Balistas.
All PvP content should be available to everyone.
Not just large guilds.
My feedback for this is both 'too long' and 'probably not applicable to Ashes' as far as I've seen. Might edit depending on a different thread.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Breach of contract/agreement, alliance with another group that benefits from 'my group' being the one to declare it, general ingame philosophical disagreements with no chance of negotiation. If wars are short, singular events, or only last 2 days, my 'honor' forces me to be a lot more lenient with the aforementioned. Wars of 3 days or more mean I will do it more often. Sieges depend on Economic factors on both sides.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
A proper implementation of the channeling/control point mechanic. The following is an example of what I mean, it may not fit Ashes, possible that it doesn't fit at all, but I'll still explain it as if it was in Ashes. This is not 'what I want to see', this is 'a random thing I came up with as an example of what might be interesting in some game'.
"When channeling the control point, there is a set area, a circle, in which you stand, and activate the 'skill' to do so. All allied members in that circle accumulate some amount of progress per second/tick. If a given player is killed by the enemy, their accumulated 'channeling power' is spread out to all others in their group in the circle who are currently also channeling. If they experience hard CC or are pulled/pushed out of the circle somehow, their channeling progress is instead lost. Channeling has at least 2s of startup time." (depending on the game/classes/abilities, maybe some could still use things like self heals or summons while channeling)
I find the 'one person is trying to do the thing, kill them, then kill the next one that tries, while PvP is just happening everywhere', pretty unsatisfying in games with certain combat designs. I like when the system matches the game's combat design. I don't think the simple 'One Person Channels The Point' is a system that matches MMORPG combat designs, personally (I also don't like 'deliver these things to this spot over time' but that one admittedly works, I just don't like it).
I like the whole strategy part, where it's not just about who has better/stronger players, but who is better at navigation around the terrain, flanking opponents, holding chokepoints, creating ambushes. A big part of this is also who has a better leader, with a group that's actually able to follow commands.
In Archeage, it was always possible to demolish a much larger group, with a small-coordinated group that knew what it was doing.
Terrain is a big part of this; hills, chokepoints, rivers, are all important, and could be utilized differently in order to gain advantage.
Definitely allow players to zoom out a bit more, in order to be able to actually see the battlefield.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Usually depends on who is holding the node/castle. If they're assholes, if they PK a lot, if they are a general nuisance for everyone, then I'd gladly declare on them.
It could also be dependent on resources. If some group is holding a very important resource for example, that your group just needs for whatever reason.
Now other than actual node and castle sieges, which should be very big events, that don't just happen every few days, we should also just be able to dominion guilds, and just have random PvP out in the world, where the goal is simply to win by killing more opponents. (Just like in Archeage, it was always fun to just flag on a guild, especially if they were running packs). Again, same things apply here, I wouldn't just flag on any guild, but only on those guilds that are considered as "enemies", toxic, known PKers, etc.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Initiator classes/abilities, and synergies.
Since there will be massive pvp, we need some specs to be able to focus on "engaging", having gap-closer abilities, AoE cc, pulls, etc. We also need specs that can follow-up, with lots of AoE damage.
At the same time, classes that maybe focus more on single target damage, and mobility, shouldn't feel useless. They should be able to flank, and pick off stragglers, scout ahead, etc.
All classes/specs should have a use in mass PvP settings, whether it's for buffs, heals, engaging, ccing, AoE damage, or nuking single targets.
Synergies between some abilities, like shown previously in updates, are also important. Maybe the engagers can pull in a group of people, but to lock them down, you need to synergize with a few AoEs from different people/classes, in order to actually lock them down. Engager shouldn't be able to do everything by themselves, but only with good synergy, and timing from your teammates.
I feel like this will make it so that a well coordinated group will always be better than just a large zerg that doesn't really know what they're doing.
And yeah, castle sieges for guilds only, node sieges for everyone. Castle sieges shouldn't have as many players as node sieges, anything more than 100 is honestly too much already.
For wars/dominions, make it a bit more interesting than just killing the other side. Objectives, dynamic events that pop up, PvE should also be incorporated in some way.
And for the love of god, add pings. Not just map pings, but actual markers that you see in the world. This way, you can actually tell everyone where to go, where to stand, etc. in a much easier and more visible way.
- Numbers < strategy/skills
- The terrain prevents regrouping and forces the group to split up (but plains are good too ^^)
- PVE objective < PVP
- Death counts, not in terms of xp but in terms of movement, you respawn far from battlefield
What would motivate me to declare a nod war:
- A nod's vassal missions/pays me to destroy its parent
- I declare war on a nod to be able to block a zone/spot/boss in that nod without the inconvenience of corruption.
- To change the type of nod
- The nod doesn't take care of its territory, for example a nod doesn't kill its goblins, so they come to my home and steal all the wood?
- 2 nod are close in terms of xp for lvl up, I attack one of them to slow it down.
- Revenge because of an "illegal" caravan/farm attack on my territory/treason.
- Influence of the nod's majority guild too great
The must-have:
- AN OPEN WORLD, it's an mmo, you have to play with others, discuss, take revenge, pay, negotiate, for something as important as a castle/nod, the strongest AND/OR most influential guild/alliance has to win. For competition between guilds, set up a guild arena with cosmetic rewards.
- A long respawn or a distant respawn, also making the rez important.
I personally would like to see siege equipment be part of the caravan system. Rather than keeping entire trebuchets in your backpack to be deployed anywhere within seconds, require them to be crafted at your home node and transported to the battlefield.
This would create lots of opportunities for player decisions and counterplay. Do you bring the trebs on the initial assault and try to blitz the castle? Do you send a forward group to lock down the castle and bring the trebs after? As the defenders, do you risk resources and time by going out in the field and trying to sabotage the enemy siege before it arrives? Or do you fortify your own defenses?
The biggest enemy was usually insane LAG with 400+ players on the screen. The second biggest issue was dealing with whales and big zerg Alliances, because it was hard to play as underdog with worse gear and smaller numbers, so most players tried to join the strongest force on the server. Imo we need some kind of feature which make it harder to occupy specific node / castle for extended period of time. For example if Alliance "A" successfully defend the first siege, then next siege attacking side will get some kind of buff that boost their stats while they remain in siege zone. This will make siege a lot more balanced and interesting in the long period of time and server might not become totally one sided after several weeks.
Also pls add L2 guild war syste where If number of guild meembers is higher than "X" you can declare war on them and if they accept, both become flagged for pvp everywhere, except the towns.
-Strong Area Effect abilities available to a variety of classes and AE/Anti-zerg builds. Most MMOs have reduced AE effectiveness if a certain number of enemies are hit. I would like that removed/excluded from Ashes and possibly have some abilities that become stronger the more enemies impacted.
-Area denial abilities like the red wall in the showcase, and directional barriers with durability like Sigma, Brigitte and Reinhardt shields in Overwatch, Jarvan's ultimate Cataclysm, Anivia's Ice wall, Braum's shield, Yasuo's wind wall, and Camille's ultimate in League of Legends.
-Map design that discourages and limits Zerg strength by having various choke points within terrain and war objectives.
Node advancement, territory control, resources, node/guild/alliance drama, maybe people just wanna PvP?
-Participant caps based on Node level (Higher level node = higher player capacity)
-Siege cooldown of at least 24 hours on the node, and a separate cooldown on using Siege Scrolls per node structure/guild/alliance
-Destructible Walls and Structures
-Extended respawn timers making kills more meaningful for both sides and preventing everlasting fights due to respawned players constantly trickling back in. Also places importance on healer's resurrecting.
-A planning stage once both sides have loaded into the Siege (5-10 mins)
-Multiple stages of a Siege that look something like this:
1. Breach the outer walls via siege equipment (Rams, Siege towers, trebuchets, catapults, etc.) or infiltration
2. Capture multiple points on the wall such as a gatehouse, towers or just specific sections.
3. Loot/Destroy x buildings, buildings of importance and/or get X amount of kills
4. Capture and hold multiple points of interest within the node like the Market, Town Square, Cathedral, etc.
5. Defeat the remaining enemies (limited respawn tickets for Defenders), kill the mayor (VIP objective), or raise your banner over the town hall before the timer runs out (capture and hold while the nodes banner is lowered and yours is raised).
Completing each stage adds time to the clock for attackers and each stage completed by the attackers determines the level of damage to the node, whether it is de-leveled, demolished, or outright conquered.
Certainly an interesting conversation starter for this topic!
What is it about your suggestion that you like, or feel would be good for the game systems?
no "unfair" gameplay like mass pull, and than cc chain until all enemys are dead.
the anvantage that gear provides in PVP should not be too big, so that new players have a chance and can enjoy the game.
Dislike
* unbalanced spawn points (e.g. spawn point allowing enemy team return to the boss location too fast after wipe - a lot of such examples in Archeage, wipe and respawn must be punishing or become mindless zerg spam too easly; on the other hand AA Kraken felt quite nice in that matter having better balance between giving time for PvE for winning side, but also some potential chances for second chance come back for loosing one than most of other events in AA, mainly because of boss distance from spawnpoints; L2 had that nicely done on castle sieges and most world bosses as well; In L2 castle siege it was designed that defenders were respawning fast, but attackers could destroy crystals inside castle's areas to slow it down significantly, while on the other side attackers had a very long path to the castle after respawn, but attacking guild could spent some materials to create a respawn flag closer to the castle - I think those are design tricks that could be very beneficial if balanced correctly)
* artificial AoE downscaling (e.g. fireball can dmg only 5 people beside the fact that it actually hit 50)
Like (quality of life)
* notifications about war kills from L2 (whole guild seeing messages "player X killed player Y from guild A") were nice
* party target markers (marking enemy as star for easier cooperation); perfectly separated from raid markers to keep party identity and team cohesion within raid itsself
* assist function, to coordinate targeting
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Primarely benefits or conflicting interests, profitable control of the castle or competing with other guild to kill rare boss for loot, but also some less obvious such as honor motivation. (e.g. other guild members killed our buddies during caravan run)
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
* logical win condition (good example is L2 castle win condition was to cast special channeling skill in throne room for 5 minutes which had to be preceded by cutting your way on the battlefield; bad example are points given by artifical activities loosely connected to the actual purpose)
* high variety of destructive objectives like gates/walls and the toolsets required to be prepared (perfectly with required gold/materials investment, so the attackers will have their risk as well) before/during siege to use against them
* after seeing flying mounts on Node preview -> the same or even more for castle owner
I would like a hot-streak feature, that gives additional risk and reward to players who rack up a lot of kills without dying. It should provide some kind of small damage or mobility buff so you can hard-carry when you're on a hot streak. But it should also give a commensurate reward for the opponent if they manage to take you down. And some kind of marker should identify you (to allies and opponents) that you're on a hotstreak, both for the sake of glory and as part of the risk.
Those kinds of systems make large, chaotic battles more exciting for solo players, since it gives them a personal goal to chase (even if their team is currently floundering). And it can also provide a bit of strategic depth if the teams work to play around (or focus-target) the current "carries" who are hot-streaking.
As for dislikes, I don't think there's anything I would complain about that's not obvious. As long as it's chaotic, I'll be having fun. So uh, just make sure there aren't frequent stalemates, I guess. Occasionally, an evenly-matched battle (with no victor) might be cool, but obviously that shouldn't be the norm.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I'm too nice; I wouldn't declare war on anyone unless they did so first or they harassed me or my allies for a long while. Good question for someone else.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
Varied stages of fighting, some that are stalled-out around choke-points (assuming the defenders are defending properly), and some with more open and fluid warfare (similar to the resource-gathering phase from the node wars preview).
Secondly, to enhance overall PvP engagement during wars and sieges and to allow players to practice and prepare, a basic dueling system should also be available at the start of A2.This would allow players to fully test the combat system quickly and easily, outside of PvP events.
For the duel mechanics, it would be appreciated if the system could accommodate both 1v1 and group vs. group formats. Additionally, implementing a separate HP bar for duels, or restoring players' HP to its previous status upon the duel ending, being canceled, or interrupted, would be beneficial. This way, players wouldn't have to rely on potions to heal after each duel.
- What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
- Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
I entered these questions in ChatGPT and agree with the output.
Systems and Features in Mass PvP Combat: Likes and Dislikes
Likes:
Large-scale Battles:
Enjoyment of participating in battles with hundreds or thousands of players, where coordination and strategy are crucial.
Siege Mechanics:
Use of siege weapons like trebuchets, ballistae, and battering rams adds depth and variety to combat.
Tactical Elements:
Importance of terrain, fortifications, and positioning. Features like walls that can be breached and gates that can be destroyed enhance the tactical complexity.
Role Diversity:
Different roles for players (e.g., infantry, cavalry, archers, siege engineers) ensure that everyone has a purpose and can contribute in unique ways.
Reward Systems:
Meaningful rewards for participation and victory, including loot, titles, and in-game currency, provide motivation and a sense of accomplishment.
Dislikes:
Lag and Performance Issues:
Server lag and performance drops during large battles can be frustrating and disrupt the experience.
Zerg Tactics:
Dislike of "zerg" tactics where sheer numbers overwhelm strategy, making individual skill and planning less important.
Unbalanced Factions:
Imbalance between factions or teams can lead to one-sided battles, reducing enjoyment and competitiveness.
Poor Communication Tools:
Lack of effective in-game communication and coordination tools can hinder teamwork and strategic planning.
Respawn and Travel Times:
Long respawn times or having to travel great distances to get back into the fight can be discouraging.
Motivation to Declare a Siege or War
Territorial Control:
Desire to control strategic locations, resources, or territory that provides significant in-game advantages.
Guild Prestige:
Enhancing the prestige and reputation of one's guild or faction through successful conquests.
Resource Acquisition:
Access to valuable resources or loot that can be gained from successful sieges.
Revenge or Rivalry:
Personal or guild vendettas and rivalries with other players or groups can be a strong motivator.
Event Participation:
Participation in special events or campaigns organized by the game or player community that involve mass PvP.
Must-Haves in Sieges
Strategic Depth:
Diverse and complex strategies that allow for different approaches to sieges, including sneaky tactics, sabotage, and diplomacy.
Balanced Mechanics:
Ensuring that both attackers and defenders have viable strategies and tools, preventing one side from having an overwhelming advantage.
Reward Systems:
Meaningful rewards that incentivize participation and contribute to long-term progression.
Dynamic Environments:
Interactive and destructible environments that add realism and tactical options.
Player Contributions:
Systems that allow players to contribute to the war effort beyond just combat, such as crafting siege weapons, building defenses, and gathering intelligence.
In-Game Communication Tools:
Robust communication tools to facilitate coordination and strategy among large groups of players.
Epic Scale:
Maintaining an epic scale and feel, with impressive visuals, sound effects, and immersive elements that make the battle feel significant.
Balanced Population:
Mechanisms to ensure population balance between factions to prevent one-sided battles.
By addressing these aspects, a PvP MMO can create a more engaging, balanced, and rewarding experience for players involved in mass PvP combat.
Map and Terrain
A well-designed map and terrain are crucial for mass PvP combat, setting the stage for strategic gameplay. Effective use of geometry, chokepoints, and positional advantages can significantly enhance the experience of mass PvP and siege warfare. A prime example is Conqueror's Blade, which features cities with large walls, extensive streets, numerous buildings, and segmented objectives, creating dynamic battlegrounds for both attackers and defenders.
Destructible Assets
Destructible assets are a vital component of siege warfare, as seen in games like Conqueror's Blade, Darkfall, Darkfall Unholy Wars, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, and Elder Scrolls Online. This feature adds a cost element to assets, encouraging players to protect their property while making attackers carefully plan their sieges. In Darkfall, for instance, everything can be destroyed, emphasizing the importance of strategic asset management and protection. This mechanic can be expanded to involve all levels of a siege, including logistical supply lines and civil engineering, catering to players who prefer non-combat roles.
Siege Vehicles, Weaponry, and Equipment
Effective siege warfare requires well-thought-out siege vehicles, weaponry, and equipment. While some games like ArcheAge and Guild Wars 2 have implemented these systems, they often lack depth. Conqueror's Blade, ArcheAge, Guild Wars 2, and Elder Scrolls Online have notable examples of diverse and unique siege weaponry. Darkfall introduced siege hammers, which could be developed further into a system of multiple tools for repairing different parts of a node. Additionally, Darkfall’s siege spikes (asset grenades) provide an interesting mechanic for breaking down walls without harming players. Expanding on the Sapper/Combat Engineer playstyle could attract players interested in small-scale operations, spying, scouting, and subterfuge. Integrating these systems with the game's economy and logistics would enhance player participation, especially for non-combatant roles.
Declaring War: Economics, Logistics, Politics, and Spite
Economic and logistical reasons are among the most compelling motivations for declaring war. In a game like Ashes of Creation, built around scarcity, these factors will naturally drive conflict. Scarcity of materials and the challenge of finding and farming rare mobs will lead players to compete for high-tier areas and form alliances to control them. Political dynamics will evolve from these economic and logistical foundations, with resource scarcity driving alliances and conflicts. Additionally, spite—stemming from personal grievances, insults, or dislikes—plays a significant role in player-driven drama and conflict, further motivating wars and sieges.
Territory Control
Territory control has been present in games like Conqueror's Blade, Darkfall, and ArcheAge, but often in a limited form. Effective territory control should offer distinct advantages and tie into the other systems mentioned. Sid Meier's Civilization system is a good model, providing a framework for further conflict and fueling node wars and sieges.
Diverse Class and Weapon Kits
Diverse classes and weapon kits are essential for engaging and varied combat. Drawing inspiration from a wide range of games, including MOBAs, can provide players with unique abilities and tactical options. These diverse kits can enhance ground utility and make combat more dynamic and interesting.
Conclusion
In summary, the best systems in mass PvP combat include well-designed maps and terrain, destructible assets, and comprehensive siege vehicles, weaponry, and equipment. Motivations for declaring war should include economic and logistical factors, political dynamics, and personal grievances. Effective territory control and diverse class and weapon kits are also crucial for creating a compelling and engaging PvP environment.
I like to have decent Siege Weapons, some for attacking cities and some for attacking players; Fun group synergies, but also the ability to play as a solo if required if your friends aren't online; Clear and precise objectives for what constitutes a win; Skills that don't just become wet sponges when you use them in PvP cos you were just fighting a PvE encounter - it sucks having to keep changing skills and gear between PvP and PvE encounters.
I don't like when people have those niche builds that make them unkillable even when there are twenty enemies all hitting them at once. Please take this into account when designing your Skills and Gear!
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Absolutely anything.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
See Likes section above.
I like when there are mechanics in place that encourage players to work together. Siege engines requiring a team to push them, the ability to form shield walls with other players, massive spells that require a full party of wizards to work together in order to cast, etc. etc.
I dislike when UI and VFX clutter up the screen so much that large battles end up looking more like two Excel spreadsheets bumping into each other. I especially dislike it when this ends up being the most optimal way to play.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I plan to leave that to the mayors/guild leaders. My aspirations begin and end with being a grunt in someone else's army.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
This is mostly an aesthetic thing, but lots of heraldry should be present to mark out either side of the conflict. These wars shouldn't look like random skirmishes between hodge-podge bands of high fantasy misfits, they should look like two opposing armies. This could be as simple as a standardized node cape, like we saw in the stream, all the way up to full sets of armor and banners that can be carried into battle.
Liked:
- Destructible walls in Elder Scrolls Online castles; more dynamic implementation would be great.
- Escape doors in castle walls that are only usable in one direction by defenders.
Disliked:What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
- Not sure about specific must-haves, but drawing inspiration from Lineage 2, Mount & Blade, ESL, and Chivalry would be great.
- Some variance for siege time (not everyone on the sever will be playing in their exact time zone)
Desired siege equipment includes:- Battering Rams
- Siege Towers (both regular and fantasy, like in Throne & Liberty)
- Catapults
- Ballistas
- Siege Cannons
- Castle wall ladders
- Boiling water cauldrons
- Droppable boulders
Additional Requests:Lots of awesome feedback to unpack here. Thank you!
Follow-up question for ya. Are the "tight corridors and small rooms" the only suggestions you'd have for tactical environmental design? Do you have any examples you'd like to provide as well?
What are some key aspects of environmental design that enhance mass PvP combat to you?
This would probably be the easiest and quickest example of what I love, except for maybe the absence of good verticality (even though it shows a bit of a staircase near the end).
This particular case was in a circular tower, so not quite a straight thin corridor, but the core of my preference is there. Places to ambush enemies. A place that doesn't fully benefit ranged characters, but they can still excel in it. A place that promotes constant movement, cause you can be pushed out of your ambushing corner.
Steven played L2 so he knows all of this. So, as usually, my example is "L2 is good
100% this.
We need to really be able to test the pvp without wasting a lot of time in between tests.
Well since we have breakable objects in the open world, we could use things like barricades that can be dps'd down to open up flanks.
Or wooden towers that rangers/mages can use to get high ground but can be broken with enough dps.
The climbable/jump puzzle walls that we saw in the showcase were cool. One thing I don't recall seeing is when a fighter air-charges to a ranger who is at the edge of a skinny wall. Do they just fall down because there is no wall to clip onto? Would this work any time that a character is at the edge of a wall or cliff, but if they accidentally take a step back then the fighter clips onto the cliff and stays?
We also seem to have a pretty cool water system in this game, might as well use that too. Moats, rivers, ponds, lakes.
Not sure if there are swamp type mechanics (movement impairing zones), but those could also be used.
Also, could you imagine if Tumok spawned in the middle of a node war? LOL that would be funny.
In shooters like BF Bad company and UT2004 they had objective modes you could capture and move forward after that point which I always liked and thought it would be cool to see implemented in a MMORPG. Basically one team is on offense and the other is on defense, once the offense takes the point the defenders spawn becomes the offenses spawn and they do that a few times.
In NW when you're at war you deal with playing king of the hill on 3 points then run through a door to play king of the hill again. Almost all of the fighting takes place in an open field which is kinda boring.
My idea would be to create an instanced area for players one being on defense and the other on offense. Offense has to capture 4 spawns before the match ends with each capture being harder for the offense to take a point with how you design the area. Balance it out so the attackers have the advantage on the first two and more of a disadvantage on the next two using things like choke points, like of sight, ramps, ladders, and height advantages to change the difficulty
dynamic gameplay
before they made planetside the dev team worked on infantry online, I loved that game it had many modes but my favorite was CTF extreme and supported random teams in a large map with 4 neutral flags that had to be grabbed and the game didn't end till one team held all 4 or the timer ran out which ran for hours from what I remember. There was large public and private teams out there all going at it on this big map.
this would be awesome to see multiple guilds going into a map and battling it out like how infantry had multiple teams playing at once on a large scale map. You could also do it so when you join you're on a public team and can switch teams, guilds would create private teams and can use this feature to pull in people from public teams and possibly recruit new members.
Public teams having strength in numbers where the guilds would be more refined and use better teamwork would lead to some interesting gameplay.
other than that I haven't seen to much PvP in MMOs where I thought the design was amazing, the fun just comes from the actual player interaction usually.
New World tried with OPR giving PvE players something to do and a boss you kill to freeze the other teams clock, it's kinda fun but it's still just zerg this and zerg that. You can keep doing zergfests but something about dropping hundreds of people into a sandbox and telling them they have to hold all 4 of these flags that are out there would just be so chaotic, I would love it so much.
Add war-machines or group-mounts that are hard to kill and can help make holes in the line, or fast enough for flanking maneuvers. Some of the big Planetside 1 and 2 battles were amazing. It shouldn't just be people on foot.
I am not a fan of spectator mode at all. Please never add that. It kills a lot of the tactics you can do with fog of war.
If they are fun, that's enough. Sure, there is politics and all that, but if you make the sieges and wars fun enough, that's really the be-all and end-all of it.
Super well-polished siege weapon gameplay. Big trebuchets, ballistas to kill the trebuchets, counter-weapons to kill those ballistas. Strong, covered battering rams, oil and big rocks falling on those rams. Siege towers! And again, please make them polished and non-clunky and intuitive to use.
Switching out some siege weapons with things like summoned siege golems and such are perfectly good ideas.
We won't be getting sappers for tunnelling as I understand it, but I would like to see tunnel warfare in existing tunnels at least, so the fighting is happening both above and below ground.
* Need mechanics to help melee range characters to exist without getting shredded by ambient damage.
* Supports! Not just buff/mana bots. Stuff like the wall and tank shield you have are good starts
* Anti-RMT (real money transaction) systems. If being in charge of stuff gets you in game money, people will abuse it. Even if they aren't doing it actively whole they play they will do it when they quit to 'cash out'.
* Anti-'handholding' systems. Players will go to great lengths to win, and win easily. For example, if it is costly to go to war and being in charge passively generates income, those in charge of nodes will at some point agree to handhold with each other and never fight. Especially when combined with some good old RMT.
What systems and features in mass PvP combat do you like and dislike?
Recently experienced probably the first mass pvp combat I did not like. And it was in TaL, it was confusing at best. There was seemingly very little guidance on what an objective was in this pvp. I had gotten a notification to go to a location where a world boss would spawn it initiated a 10 minute or so open ffa pvp zone which was fun while waiting for the boss to spawn but once the boss had spawned I assumed the objective would be to kill the boss. However, there were some people who did not even attack the boss and only killed players. I had no idea what the objective actually was and there was little to no guidance on what players should actually be trying to achieve. I got warnings when I would go to attack other players letting me know it would flag me so I wouldn't attack and then I would get attacked a few seconds later. It was the most unenjoyable pvp I've ever been apart of and if I were to continue playing I would have just never attended another event like this because of how chaotic it was in its direction of goals.
What would motivate you to declare a siege or war on others in-game?
I am not sure at this point. I would need to see what in game feels like.
Are there any must-haves that you would like to see in sieges?
The one aspect I felt this stream was missing was the lack of utilizing crafters in sieges and node wars. I understand that maybe the systems are not ready for this but I would have like to have heard plans of this coming in the future.
I definitely want to see wood working crafters on the front lines building siege weapons, I want to see gatherers bringing their best farmed lumber, etc. Or specific node war/siege caravans or small carts bringing materials to those front lines. Allowing for further disruption of battle as well. It would also be something for people who know they are being attacked to have a short period to build up makeshift walls to help bottle neck key locations in the battle or protect weak locations, etc. Attackers might arrive to the battle to find these defensive structures and target them to destroy them as apart of the fight.
For them NOT to be instanced (as I've heard that was the plan). It would give a "The Ride of the Rohirrim
" scenario no chance to happen at the last minute of the siege and to make a turn of a tide and that is a big deal especially for a political community driven open world MMO