JWhex wrote:
the whole Bloodtide fluff abomination

What's wrong with the Bloodtide fluff?

AWesker1976 wrote:google "Khornate Knights"

Exactly the kind of hyperbole I was referring to. Thank you for this example.

The worst thing is, there are actually fans who pick this up and believe it as-is.

 Lynata wrote:
It may actually be better if they're kept out of the game. I've always been of the opinion that such things should either be done correctly, or not at all.

JWhex wrote:
the whole Bloodtide fluff abomination

What's wrong with the Bloodtide fluff?

The idea that rubbing the blood of a sister of battle on your armour and weapons in order to protect yourself is too strange for me and clashes with the idea on how imperials usually do rituals (would make more sense for a chaos or dark eldar character) which is usually through strength of

character, artifacts, prayer, sermons, etc.

Ah, yes. It certainly is a bit unorthodox, albeit more towards the Grey Knights than the Sisters of Battle, and I'd agree it did change their portrayal quite a bit - like the rest of the GK's new Codex with all those sorcery bits.

Still, the Grey Knights certainly aren't "Imperials" by the common definition, which would include adherence to the Imperial Creed. I mean, there's way older fluff on quite a number of Space Marine Chapters who gain strength by eating the flesh of their enemies (or at least that's what they believe). The Sons of Malice were excommunicated for this. The GK just have the Inquisition's special carte-blanche.

"Do what must be done" is a strong theme with the Grey Knights, now more than ever, so they don't shy back from anything. Not even from killing allies and harvesting their blood, if it helps them accomplish their mission against the Ruinous Powers.

Let's not get bogged down in a debate on that trashy little piece of writing and instead get bogged down in a debate on this trashy little piece of game.

I'd prefer they went the Guild Wars 2 route and just sold the damned thing in a box.

 Melissia wrote:
Let's not get bogged down in a debate on that trashy little piece of writing and instead get bogged down in a debate on this trashy little piece of game.

I'd prefer they went the Guild Wars 2 route and just sold the damned thing in a box.

When it comes to F2P the box thing always puzzles me. I mean the point of F2P is to try before you buy. When you have to buy the box, you don't really get to try and I wonder how that stacks up number wise with actual F2P.

Oh, there is a mandatory box purchase involved now? I suppose that means that the term F2P does no longer apply, and it's rather a "Premium" thing now.

It's certainly an interesting concept. Other MMOs did box purchase + subscription fee before, and yet others had no box purchase, but a subscription fee for "premium" access and limitations for free players.
So why not do a hybrid of box purchase + subscription or limited account?

(I'd assume this isn't a new thing either, I just can't recall a game that did something like this before)

I think that's how boxes work for FTP. You get an exclusive (as an added incentive) and premium time for the money.

Quite frankly, the love-hate relationship he seems to have with the F2P players reminds me too much of Zynga's model. 90% of their revenue stream is derived from 10% of their players, and 10% of their revenue stream is from 90% of their players.

I'm starting to see a lot of influences from other games, in terms of concept and ideas, as well as modus operandi. This guy essentially wants to pull the best features from other games that have been successful and toss them together, it sounds like.

 n0t_u wrote:
I think that's how boxes work for FTP. You get an exclusive (as an added incentive) and premium time for the money.

Depends on the game.

For games like Guild Wars 2, you buy the game, and you don't ever have to pay subscription fees.

For games like WoW, you buy the game and get X number of months subscription.

So this ones going the "Freemium" route eh?

Well expect rampant power abuse and entire servers being owned by clans of deep pocked douche bags who throw hundreds of dollars to win every conflict...

I know paying to play sounds like a drag, but honestly if everyone is paying to play the game, that means everyone is starting on a level playing field, no amount of real life currency can help them win any one fight, only keep playing the game as whole.

Developer Interview wrote:"As an example we won’t have the Sisters of Battle at launch. We love them, but the reason why they won’t be playable at launch is because it’s almost impossible to make the kind of power they have fit the lore and make it fun at the same time. They always end up being killed by their own team because their pure blood is useful to defeat demons. It’s very difficult to implement that kind of sacrifice in the gameplay and still make it fun to play as a character."

HATE.

 Lynata wrote:

JWhex wrote:
the whole Bloodtide fluff abomination

What's wrong with the Bloodtide fluff?

It is stupid, offensive, uninteresting and destructive.

It is stupid because slaughtering loyalists and daubing your armour in their blood should not be a vulnerability for a fething Bloodthirster. It's like creating a new Great Unclean One character whose only weakness is the bubonic plague.

It is offensive because it is a disrespectful treatment of the Sisters of Battle, both as women and as another playable faction. It's bad for the same reason having everyone and their dog kill an Avatar is bad writing - contributing to a collaborative work carries the obligation to not gak all over everyone else's work.

It is uninteresting because externalising the sacrifice of the Grey Knights diminishes them. I liked the Grey Knights as something more and something less than human - immune to the predations of daemons because they had cut away everything that makes a person vulnerable, but leaving them less than people. Ward ruined that by making everyone else pay the price instead, while the Grey Knights conduct blood rituals, carry daemon weapons and associate with daemonhosts with impunity.

And it is destructive because it gives people like that developer stupid, offensive, uninteresting ideas.

Damn, just read this. The stuff he said about the Sisters was... Worrying, to say the least.

Though on the bright side, he did pretty much say that if they were implemented, they'd be their own faction. And obviously they're not going to spill their own damn blood to fight daemons.

Hopefully the blood thing was just an on-the-spot ass-pull.

That aside, I'm tentatively enthusiastic for it. I like that he said the combat would be a bit like Space Marine. Would be really interesting to have that sort of gameplay against hordes of player-controlled enemies.

I'm interested in seeing areas being fleshed out and playing a dirt bag Eldar Rogue.

 AlexHolker wrote:
It is uninteresting because externalising the sacrifice of the Grey Knights diminishes them. I liked the Grey Knights as something more and something less than human - immune to the predations of daemons because they had cut away everything that makes a person vulnerable, but leaving them less than people.

If you're an SoB fan displeased with the bloodtide, this is actually one very positive thing that you can take away from it. Some of the Sisters were actually so pure as to be immune, while the Knights needed to rely on a ritual to gain that same immunity.

If you're a GK fan, not so much I guess. Honestly I find it odd that they weren't just immune like some of the Sisters, since Knights are fluffed as the very most incorruptible.

 JakeCWolf wrote:
So this ones going the "Freemium" route eh?

Well expect rampant power abuse and entire servers being owned by clans of deep pocked douche bags who throw hundreds of dollars to win every conflict...

I know paying to play sounds like a drag, but honestly if everyone is paying to play the game, that means everyone is starting on a level playing field, no amount of real life currency can help them win any one fight, only keep playing the game as whole.

Yeah, but this d-bag says, specifically, that his company doesn't care about balance and they will not balance the game.

 Melissia wrote:

 JakeCWolf wrote:
So this ones going the "Freemium" route eh?

Well expect rampant power abuse and entire servers being owned by clans of deep pocked douche bags who throw hundreds of dollars to win every conflict...

I know paying to play sounds like a drag, but honestly if everyone is paying to play the game, that means everyone is starting on a level playing field, no amount of real life currency can help them win any one fight, only keep playing the game as whole.

Yeah, but this d-bag says, specifically, that his company doesn't care about balance and they will not balance the game.

Because imbalance makes people want to throw more money at the system to win. So, yeah, it's a pay-to-win game. At least he's being honest with it lol.

Or it makes them decide to play a different game instead because they're bored.

Melissa can you provide a list of mmorpgs that were balanced on release?

Alright, so I got extra nerdy and actually e-mailed them. They've asked me to pass on their responses to you folks.

David, your Creative director and Brent lead gameplay love the Sisters!!

My explanation to the media was very simple and made for the mass market and not for the true fans of the IP.

All races and chapters in the IP COULD be playable by the players except Tyranids which have a hivemind (play by us the studio :-) )

But, Necron and Sisters, if we want to be true to the IP will be made for ''skilled'' players since they have a lot of depth and complexity to them.

Like you said, the first 4 races we selected, so far, are everybody's favorite number 2, which make them a good overall selection.

Please convey to the real fans on the forum that we are making THEIR game but that not everybody knows the IP like they do and we all want (including them) to have enough players in the game to make it fun and for the game to last.... Eternal!!!! :-) so in interview I try not to be too Hardcore with my explanation.

The team and I play the tabletop everyweek and we have more than 10k$ worth of army at the office.... We will post some pictures soon (when we are done painting them)

I wished you lived in Montreal..... We have thousand to paints!! ;-)

Anyway, for now, we have to trust Eldars to bring Sexiness to the game.... Then again I find Orcs sexy too!! Lol

Only through death does duty ends!

Miguel

-- Miguel Caron, Head of Studio, Online Games division

Like Miguel said Sisters of the battle were in the initial list with Tau and Imperial guard, when we had to select the ones we will launch with.

We had to make tough choices for the 4 initial factions, but please don’t despair, our post-launch plan is to bring more factions into the war.

Sisters of Battle are among the first batch we want to add.

We did select Space-Marines, Orks, Eldar and Chaos Space-Marines because of their popularity mainly and because they are iconic factions of the 40k universe.

For the Sisters of Battle, I agree with you they are not too far from female space marines without the body enhancements coming from the gene seeds of the Adeptus Astartes.

Giving that option for the players of the Imperium was really seducing for us but the implicit implication of the inquisition in the conflict at this point was too much of a constraint for us.

As you well know if we say too much about Chaos and the Inquisition then Exterminatus may follow! But I already said too much… J

Please say hello to the Dakkadakka forum folks for us!

They always have been a great source of information for our regular battles. In case of a disagreement about a point of rule we are checking Dakkadakka before to take a decision.

Thanks for the links by the way (I didn’t know that the Sisters deployed 10 Companies/Preceptories during the wars of Armageddon and 19 during the 13th black Crusade).

Cheers!

David

PS: I am curious, without the Sisters of battle at launch, which Faction will you play in waiting for the Adepta Sororitas?

-- David Ghozland, Creative Director

I have to say, I was surprised to get a reply (a) at all, (b) so soon and (c) from several people in their studio. It seems they like to keep close to the playerbase (which I always liked in a gaming studio), though I expect this may become less regular later on when the game is growing and they get more and more work on their desks. If the Sisters really are amongst the first factions they'd like to add, this is certainly more than I had actually dared to hope for. I'll remain cautious, but let's see what the future holds!

Edit: Nvm I miss read

 BryllCream wrote:
Melissa can you provide a list of mmorpgs that were balanced on release?

No other game developer for any mmo in existence has outright stated that balance is something they don't care about at all.

No other mmo is truly "balanced" but the devs strive to tweak the game to make it as balanced as they can possibly get. This dev has stated that balance is not something he's willing to spend resources to achieve and that we should just accept it.

Edit to add:

I wonder how the Tyrannid aspect will work. Will they just appear and that fighting the overpopulated side?

A good game designer doesn't strive for perfect balance. Perfect balance being easy to do anyway.

 BryllCream wrote:
Melissa can you provide a list of mmorpgs that were balanced on release?

Irrelevant. Most developers actually TRY to balance their games. Maybe not "perfect balance" since that's impossible while keeping complexity, but they certainly try to keep it so that, if they have multiple factions in pvp, each faction is capable of winning relatively equally with the others.

Guild Wars 2 is relatively balanced now, but it wasn't balanced when it was released-- they still tried to balance it though. They don't actively say "feth balance".

 Lynata wrote:
[snip]
If the Sisters really are amongst the first factions they'd like to add, this is certainly more than I had actually dared to hope for. I'll remain cautious, but let's see what the future holds!

I might even try it if they do. I doubt they will though.

It sounds like a cheap CYA cop-out though, compared to the statements they made earlier.

 Lynata wrote:
Alright, so I got extra nerdy and actually e-mailed them. They've asked me to pass on their responses to you folks.

David, your Creative director and Brent lead gameplay love the Sisters!!

My explanation to the media was very simple and made for the mass market and not for the true fans of the IP.

All races and chapters in the IP COULD be playable by the players except Tyranids which have a hivemind (play by us the studio :-) )

But, Necron and Sisters, if we want to be true to the IP will be made for ''skilled'' players since they have a lot of depth and complexity to them.

Like you said, the first 4 races we selected, so far, are everybody's favorite number 2, which make them a good overall selection.

Please convey to the real fans on the forum that we are making THEIR game but that not everybody knows the IP like they do and we all want (including them) to have enough players in the game to make it fun and for the game to last.... Eternal!!!! :-) so in interview I try not to be too Hardcore with my explanation.

The team and I play the tabletop everyweek and we have more than 10k$ worth of army at the office.... We will post some pictures soon (when we are done painting them)

I wished you lived in Montreal..... We have thousand to paints!! ;-)

Anyway, for now, we have to trust Eldars to bring Sexiness to the game.... Then again I find Orcs sexy too!! Lol

Only through death does duty ends!

Miguel

-- Miguel Caron, Head of Studio, Online Games division

Like Miguel said Sisters of the battle were in the initial list with Tau and Imperial guard, when we had to select the ones we will launch with.

We had to make tough choices for the 4 initial factions, but please don’t despair, our post-launch plan is to bring more factions into the war.

Sisters of Battle are among the first batch we want to add.

We did select Space-Marines, Orks, Eldar and Chaos Space-Marines because of their popularity mainly and because they are iconic factions of the 40k universe.

For the Sisters of Battle, I agree with you they are not too far from female space marines without the body enhancements coming from the gene seeds of the Adeptus Astartes.

Giving that option for the players of the Imperium was really seducing for us but the implicit implication of the inquisition in the conflict at this point was too much of a constraint for us.

As you well know if we say too much about Chaos and the Inquisition then Exterminatus may follow! But I already said too much… J

Please say hello to the Dakkadakka forum folks for us!

They always have been a great source of information for our regular battles. In case of a disagreement about a point of rule we are checking Dakkadakka before to take a decision.

Thanks for the links by the way (I didn’t know that the Sisters deployed 10 Companies/Preceptories during the wars of Armageddon and 19 during the 13th black Crusade).

Cheers!

David

PS: I am curious, without the Sisters of battle at launch, which Faction will you play in waiting for the Adepta Sororitas?

-- David Ghozland, Creative Director

I have to say, I was surprised to get a reply (a) at all, (b) so soon and (c) from several people in their studio. It seems they like to keep close to the playerbase (which I always liked in a gaming studio), though I expect this may become less regular later on when the game is growing and they get more and more work on their desks. If the Sisters really are amongst the first factions they'd like to add, this is certainly more than I had actually dared to hope for. I'll remain cautious, but let's see what the future holds!

Interesting. I got the impression that they have quite a bit of love for the Sisters, especially since they say that Sisters were considered for the initial list and are desired for the first addon (despite not being the most prominent race). That's put my mind at ease a bit about how Sisters'll be portrayed if they're added. Thanks for taking the trouble to email them.

Edit : deleted

Interesting. I'm actually really intrigued by the fact that they did reply to you, and so soon to boot. I'm a little bit less skeptical about this now. I'm wondering if they'll want to come on-board to Dakka and join our discussions here, though. It might be interesting!

We'll see if they actually hold up to that statement. I have two decades of experience with the gaming industry's treatment of female characters that leaves me supremely skeptical.

 Melissia wrote:
We'll see if they actually hold up to that statement. I have two decades of experience with the gaming industry's treatment of female characters that leaves me supremely skeptical.

I'd say that the Sisters are in a pretty good position to get a positive portrayal here. From the sounds of it, if added, they're going to be their own self-contained faction, so it's not like they've got anybody to play second fiddle to in terms of characterisation.

Also, one thing that I kinda liked is that one of the email guys said that they're regarded as for "skilled players" and as having "lots of depth and complexity", so it sounds like they're very much getting their due amount of consideration and respect at this stage.

But yeah, way too early to tell. Though the information we have presently seems fairly promising.

 Enigwolf wrote:
I'm wondering if they'll want to come on-board to Dakka and join our discussions here, though. It might be interesting!

Doubtful. I think that developers are generally discouraged to mingle in fan forums, lest they let slip something that they shouldn't.

Still, they know we exist. So they may be reading this very thread right now...

You know, we don't have to be so pessimistic. It's ok to be optimistic. They very well might add the sisters. They could actually be a rather fun army.

nomotog wrote:
You know, we don't have to be so pessimistic.

Being pessimistic means that I am never disappointed. I can only confirm my pessimism or be pleasantly surprised at being wrong.

So, Melissa, now you are referring to the developer as a douche bag. Your extremism really destroys your credibility in this thread. Why are you so wound up about this guy?

Go re read the interview. He says that he doesn't care about game balance *at launch*. It will have to be balanced in time or the whole game would be unplayable.

 BryllCream wrote:
Go re read the interview. He says that he doesn't care about game balance.

That's not what he said.

 BryllCream wrote:
It will have to be balanced in time or the whole game would be unplayable.

Since when has that ever stopped devs?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

JWhex wrote:
So, Melissa, now you are referring to the developer as a douche bag. Your extremism really destroys your credibility in this thread.

I don't care.

As for why I dislike the way he's presented himself? Because of practically everything the guy said in the first two interviews about the game. "I hate free players they're all donkey-caves and gak-fethers and I want to punish them for playing my game!" "Durr Sisters are just there to be slaughtered by their allies." "We want you to backstab your friends and create characters specifically to spy on the other factions!" Etc etc etc. Aside from it being a third person shooter, there wasn't really a single good thing about the game said in those interviews, and to top it off he made himself sound like a total tool repeating "there is only war!" as if it was some kind of an answer to the questions he was asked.

I don't really care about my "credibility" regarding this thread. I'm not representing a multimillion dollar investment in a game that will take years of man-hours to produce and is wanting to change the industry forever. I'm just me, and that means I'm going to be as honest as I possibly can.

Melissia, you can remain skeptical of the game, I certainly am, but personally insulting the developer is too far.

Why can't you be more mildly amused at the things he says like I am?

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Why can't you be more mildly amused at the things he says like I am?

I'm being outspoken and passionate about my opinions because I want more from the game, even if I don't expect it.

I probably should have phrased myself as "he made himself sound like a total d-bag" but meh, too late for htat.

 Melissia wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:
Go re read the interview. He says that he doesn't care about game balance at launch.

That's not what he said.

Yes it is:

"I don't care about game balance at launch" he said.

I'd like to hear you explain how those last two words away

Since when has that ever stopped devs?

That's childish. Devs aren't going to sit back and watch one faction dominate the game world when they could balance them by simply tweaking some numbers, they're not idiots.

Because Melissia is well... being herself. People might be forgetting that the game is planing one of the worst F2P models I have seen in recent years. That is something to be very cynical about.

 BryllCream wrote:
they're not idiots.

In many cases, that's debatable. But we're getting off topic here.

 BryllCream wrote:
Go re read the interview. He says that he doesn't care about game balance *at launch*. It will have to be balanced in time or the whole game would be unplayable.

I am with Melissia on this one. Imbalance at launch is exactly what a greedy F2P developer loves. It's perfect for your business model! If at launch, there are heavy advantages for paying players. Have a look at qualitative F2P studies. The primary motivation for people to spend money isn't "fun". It's frustration and power. Most people spend money either out of frustration in order to be stronger than the person who won vs them before or because they simply want to be superior. Easy cash for you. It starts a very expensive circle as the enemy now starts to spend money too...etc. The only winner in this race? The developer.

The sad thing is: it can work the other way around as well. League of Legends is the most successful F2P game out there but has a very fair F2P system with no advantages for anyone. Why does it work? Because it hopped on the DotA bandwagon, of course, but still has top-notch design. It's an extremely good game.

Now...what is easier? Design a very good game that draws a lot of people in? Or have a system that also makes a lot of money because it is Pay-to-Win?

Bazinga.

nomotog wrote:
Because Melissia is well... being herself. People might be forgetting that the game is planing one of the worst F2P models I have seen in recent years. That is something to be very cynical about.

Why is it? Why do you have a right to play a game for free? It's hardly on the same level as sunlight or water

Personally, the notion of paying a subscription fee has always been fething stupid from my point of view, and is why I've never played World of Warcraft. I already bought the game, I am not going to continue paying someone to pay it. I would not get this game based on that alone, unless it were truly spectacular.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
Personally, the notion of paying a subscription fee has always been fething stupid from my point of view, and is why I've never played World of Warcraft. I already bought the game, I am not going to continue paying someone to pay it. I would not get this game based on that alone, unless it were truly spectacular.

To be fair, though, a MMORPG has significantly higher upkeep costs than a regular title. 13€, however, are too high imo. 5€ is a fair compromise imo...but alas, GW2 managed to get away with no fees and it's an outstanding game!

That's true.

Which is a shame, since MMORPGs are in general worse games than normal games, so despite the cost to upkeep them, I have no incentive to actually play them.

nomotog wrote:one of the worst F2P models I have seen in recent years

I don't know - I actually like the idea, it just really, really depends on how many people play which faction. If "Orks = Free" is enough to get more people to play Orks than Space Marines, I would personally welcome the challenge of basically zerg-rushing the individually stronger factions, just like I think it'd be fun from the other side to try and "stem the tide".

The only problem is that this concept is very vulnerably to tipping too far towards either extreme - on one side Orks being so numerous that it gets impossible to establish a defense against them, and on the other Orks not being numerous enough to actually give them a chance at winning. Needless to say, Space Marines are the more popular faction. But is their popularity stronger than the attraction of Orks being free? That is impossible to say at this point, and I don't see why the debate needs to get hung up on this bit when the developers have not gone into further detail yet, and when we keep in mind that, in theory, they may well implement mechanics such as different player caps per map instance.

Which is kinda how it worked in Dawn of War (if you replace "player" with "unit") and worked well to balance the races in that game.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:
Go re read the interview. He says that he doesn't care about game balance *at launch*. It will have to be balanced in time or the whole game would be unplayable.

I am with Melissia on this one. Imbalance at launch is exactly what a greedy F2P developer loves. It's perfect for your business model! If at launch, there are heavy advantages for paying players. Have a look at qualitative F2P studies. The primary motivation for people to spend money isn't "fun". It's frustration and power. Most people spend money either out of frustration in order to be stronger than the person who won vs them before or because they simply want to be superior. Easy cash for you. It starts a very expensive circle as the enemy now starts to spend money too...etc. The only winner in this race? The developer.

It's cute you think that developers would deliberately inbalance the game...because we all know game balance just falls into developers hands and it's up to them to screw it up? Lol. Game developers *wish* they could imbalance a game to make money

 BryllCream wrote:

It's cute you think that developers would deliberately inbalance the game...b

Bryll, they do. Most F2P games do so...deal more damage, have more hp, unlock considerably stronger weapons etc. That's what "Pay to win" refers to. It's standard practice...check it out.

 Lynata wrote:

nomotog wrote:one of the worst F2P models I have seen in recent years

I don't know - I actually like the idea, it just really, really depends on how many people play which faction. If "Orks = Free" is enough to get more people to play Orks than Space Marines, I would personally welcome the challenge of basically zerg-rushing the individually stronger factions, just like I think it'd be fun from the other side to try and "stem the tide".

The only problem is that this concept is very vulnerably to tipping too far towards either extreme - on one side Orks being so numerous that it gets impossible to establish a defense against them, and on the other Orks not being numerous enough to actually give them a chance at winning. Needless to say, Space Marines are the more popular faction. But is their popularity stronger than the attraction of Orks being free? That is impossible to say at this point, and I don't see why the debate needs to get hung up on this bit when the developers have not gone into further detail yet, and when we keep in mind that, in theory, they may well implement mechanics such as different player caps per map instance.

Which is kinda how it worked in Dawn of War (if you replace "player" with "unit") and worked well to balance the races in that game.

I actually agree with this, the only thing I'm worried about is that paying Ork players may end up getting shafted by this. One would assume paying ork players would end up as the nobs, mekboys and all the specialized classes. However, since they are allied with the free players they may end up being completely unreliable due to needing boys with them.

 BryllCream wrote:

It's cute you think that developers would deliberately inbalance the game...because we all know game balance just falls into developers hands and it's up to them to screw it up? Lol. Game developers *wish* they could imbalance a game to make money

Only the developers have said "War is not balanced, why should a game about war be balanced?" and confirmed that Ork players are starting out a fifth as strong as a starting Marine player, so there is basis for it.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

It's cute you think that developers would deliberately inbalance the game...b

Bryll, they do. Most F2P games do so...deal more damage, have more hp, unlock considerably stronger weapons etc. That's what "Pay to win" refers to. It's standard practice...check it out.

You can't equate "pay to win" with "pay to not pay the demo race". Orks are nerfed because they're free. If you don't want to be nerfed, pay for the damn game.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

It's cute you think that developers would deliberately inbalance the game...because we all know game balance just falls into developers hands and it's up to them to screw it up? Lol. Game developers *wish* they could imbalance a game to make money

Only the developers have said "War is not balanced, why should a game about war be balanced?" and confirmed that Ork players are starting out a fifth as strong as a starting Marine player, so there is basis for it.

Right, because orks are free You're kidding yourself if you think the actual game will simply involve space marines stomping around killing everyone else. such a game would be boring to play as any of the races, and flop.

 BryllCream wrote:

Orks are nerfed because they're free. If you don't want to be nerfed, pay for the damn game.

Pay-to-win, textbook definition.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

Orks are nerfed because they're free. If you don't want to be nerfed, pay for the damn game.

Pay-to-win, textbook definition.

You're just being childish now. You're honestly that complaining that the full game is better than the demo? If you want something, pay for it.

 BryllCream wrote:
Right, because orks are free You're kidding yourself if you think the actual game will simply involve space marines stomping around killing everyone else. such a game would be boring to play as any of the races, and flop.

Beware who you condescend to my son. It doesn't work on people smarter than you.

Paying Ork players start off weaker than Marines, by they dev's wording. They can advance further, but that doesn't change the fact that Marines are starting off with a notable advantage against Ork players.

Lynata, thanks for emailing the staff! I find myself more interested thanks to their responses.

 BryllCream wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

Orks are nerfed because they're free. If you don't want to be nerfed, pay for the damn game.

Pay-to-win, textbook definition.

You're just being childish now. You're honestly that complaining that the full game is better than the demo? If you want something, pay for it.

It is not the demo. It's the entire game. It's marketed as such. It considerably favors paying players. It gives them a huge advantage over other players. What about players who want to play Orks for fluff reasons? Screwed over.

It's a very poor Pay-to-Win concept and it's a shame to use 40k for such purposes.

 Void__Dragon wrote:

Paying Ork players start off weaker than Marines, by they dev's wording. They can advance further, but that doesn't change the fact that Marines are starting off with a notable advantage against Ork players.

And you know how long it will take, do you? You know that orks can't get to an equal footing with marine players by simply killing tyranids? You know that they won't be able to craft their way up?

You seem to be imagining the worst possible game they could make, then deciding that's what they *are* making. Individual orks are inferior to a single space marine in the fluff, only at higher levels does it balance out (and indeed, swing the other way - though back into balance once you account for wargear). So the devs could either impliment this, while cleverly introducing them as a free-to-play race at lower levels, or they could piss over the fluff and have ork boys tearing through power armour with ease.

 BryllCream wrote:

 Void__Dragon wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

It's cute you think that developers would deliberately inbalance the game...because we all know game balance just falls into developers hands and it's up to them to screw it up? Lol. Game developers *wish* they could imbalance a game to make money

Only the developers have said "War is not balanced, why should a game about war be balanced?" and confirmed that Ork players are starting out a fifth as strong as a starting Marine player, so there is basis for it.

Right, because orks are free You're kidding yourself if you think the actual game will simply involve space marines stomping around killing everyone else. such a game would be boring to play as any of the races, and flop.

He does raise a good point. As the developer tells it, the Ork faction is going to be heavily shaped by those FTP players. Could be that the masses of FTPs, on top of the regular paying Ork players, gives the Orks an unfair advantage at first. Conversely, the FTPs could hold the Orks back somehow, maybe by taking away spaces from the normal, paying Orks. Though if it becomes a major issue, one would expect the devs to address it.

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

Orks are nerfed because they're free. If you don't want to be nerfed, pay for the damn game.

Pay-to-win, textbook definition.

You're just being childish now. You're honestly that complaining that the full game is better than the demo? If you want something, pay for it.

It is not the demo. It's the entire game. It's marketed as such. It considerably favors paying players. It gives them a huge advantage over other players. What about players who want to play Orks for fluff reasons? Screwed over.

...for the first few levels. When was the last time you heard someone complaining about WOW's balance at level 5? It does not make up the majority of the game for ork players.

 BryllCream wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:

Orks are nerfed because they're free. If you don't want to be nerfed, pay for the damn game.

Pay-to-win, textbook definition.

You're just being childish now. You're honestly that complaining that the full game is better than the demo? If you want something, pay for it.

It is not the demo. It's the entire game. It's marketed as such. It considerably favors paying players. It gives them a huge advantage over other players. What about players who want to play Orks for fluff reasons? Screwed over.

...for the first few levels. When was the last time you heard someone complaining about WOW's balance at level 5? It does not make up the majority of the game for ork players.

Mainly because WoW is extremely well-balanced, has hardly different classes and PvP doesn't begin before level...~30.

Soladrin wrote:I actually agree with this, the only thing I'm worried about is that paying Ork players may end up getting shafted by this. One would assume paying ork players would end up as the nobs, mekboys and all the specialized classes. However, since they are allied with the free players they may end up being completely unreliable due to needing boys with them.

True, I suppose that adds a bit of extra difficulty to the balancing act. They need not only to keep in mind the hordes of free players, but also the paying Orks - and vice versa. Ideally, should they actually end up implementing mechanics to somehow "steer" player participation towards specific battle zones in the hopes of allowing roughly equal forces to clash, they should probably have at least a good guess of how many Ork players are dropping in as Boyz and how many are dropping as something more dangerous, and calculate the limits accordingly.

That being said ... let's not forget that, from all the descriptions provided so far, the game sounds a bit "open world" with large maps allowing for lots of player initiative. In this, the forces need not be balanced because you'll rarely have equal numbers clash with each other anyways. It could well be like in Planetside where you're better off finding a bunch of other players to hang around with, and march to battle alongside them. It doesn't matter whether you run around solo as a Space Marine or an Ork Boy, you're bound to get killed quickly either way. If they are really designing the game this way, I'd expect a lot of back and forth, with many ad-hoc armies forming up, pushing into enemy territory, and retreating again or getting ripped apart once the enemy gets their act together. This can work with Orks just as it can work with Marines. Ideally, those Orks who pay to play will have a better ability to direct their forces, and perhaps not only get a stronger character for their cash but also the feeling of playing an important role on the battlefield, as a lot of Boyz may stick to your flag. Which kinda sounds fun, and is more than the Space Marine players can say.

If I were the devs, I'd actually consider expanding this idea and make the Imperial Guard the same. And add free Cultists to the CSMs.

 Sigvatr wrote:

Mainly because WoW is extremely well-balanced, has hardly different classes and PvP doesn't begin before level...~30.

And you know that the "proper" game for this 40k MMO won't start at level x because?

For all we know everything under level 10 will take place in our race's homeland, and orks are free until level 10. See how many things you're presuming?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Lynata wrote:

If I were the devs, I'd actually consider expanding this idea and make the Imperial Guard the same. And add free Cultists to the CSMs.

Not sure about Imperial Guard, since ideally they'd get their own race. But it's a good idea otherwise, free cultists for CSMs, free scouts for Marines, free ??? for eldar.

I dont think balance matters that much, if its enjoyable people will play, massive scale fps games are better balanced for groups of players too I think, rather than 1 v 1.
It seems that only recently in the past years since wow, that people have started banging on about balance all the time.
Anyway, although it all sounds awsome, It also sounds far too ambitious, especially when I look at the people making it, maybe it will be their break out game, I hope so but I also doubt it will happen.

 Melissia wrote:
Yeah, but this d-bag says, specifically, that his company doesn't care about balance and they will not balance the game.

All we really know about the game so far is that one of the people involved is prone to saying stupid, flippant nonsense - doubtless considering it all very witty and edgy.

So ok, we know we have a game developer with no social skills. This is not a terrible shock. As to the actual game, we'll probably have something to talk about in about a year.

-D

 BryllCream wrote:

nomotog wrote:
Because Melissia is well... being herself. People might be forgetting that the game is planing one of the worst F2P models I have seen in recent years. That is something to be very cynical about.

Why is it? Why do you have a right to play a game for free? It's hardly on the same level as sunlight or water

People can no longer take that outlook of oh it's free. Because we have so many free games that just being free isn't as enticeing as it use to be. Now you have to be free fair and fun in order to compete.

 Lynata wrote:

nomotog wrote:one of the worst F2P models I have seen in recent years

I don't know - I actually like the idea, it just really, really depends on how many people play which faction. If "Orks = Free" is enough to get more people to play Orks than Space Marines, I would personally welcome the challenge of basically zerg-rushing the individually stronger factions, just like I think it'd be fun from the other side to try and "stem the tide".

The only problem is that this concept is very vulnerably to tipping too far towards either extreme - on one side Orks being so numerous that it gets impossible to establish a defense against them, and on the other Orks not being numerous enough to actually give them a chance at winning. Needless to say, Space Marines are the more popular faction. But is their popularity stronger than the attraction of Orks being free? That is impossible to say at this point, and I don't see why the debate needs to get hung up on this bit when the developers have not gone into further detail yet, and when we keep in mind that, in theory, they may well implement mechanics such as different player caps per map instance.

Which is kinda how it worked in Dawn of War (if you replace "player" with "unit") and worked well to balance the races in that game.

I like the intent. I just don't think it should be mixed in with the pricing. If I wanted to be a SM, but I had to play an ork boy. That wouldn't be fun or fair. Myself, I want to be an ork boy so it doesn't hurt me, but the unfairness reaks..

The lack of solo play is what's killing this for me so far, I like PVP as much as the next guy, especially cutting tanks throats and merrily dancing away or raining magic artillery down from the next post code over, but the bulk of my time in an MMO is spent doing my own thing, caving in PVE skulls and looting stuff for funsies.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
The lack of solo play is what's killing this for me so far, I like PVP as much as the next guy, especially cutting tanks throats and merrily dancing away or raining magic artillery down from the next post code over, but the bulk of my time in an MMO is spent doing my own thing, caving in PVE skulls and looting stuff for funsies.

For that, there's the 'Nids. Sounds like they're pretty much just lots of NPCs that the devs can manipulate.

Sure thing, but the article intoned that solo play would be a far more difficult slog then joining hands with everyone for some hippy drum circle or whatever it is you do in groups while the rest of us are being awesome and tearing demons faces in half on our own.

 Rayvon wrote:
I dont think balance matters that much, if its enjoyable people will play, massive scale fps games are better balanced for groups of players too I think, rather than 1 v 1.
It seems that only recently in the past years since wow, that people have started banging on about balance all the time.
Anyway, although it all sounds awsome, It also sounds far too ambitious, especially when I look at the people making it, maybe it will be their break out game, I hope so but I also doubt it will happen.

I thinks it's because many people (myself included) like the idea of being able to choose any character and be able to stand a chance against others, also their is a mentality that video games should be about testing skill and not about exploiting some class because it's easier to use.

 BryllCream wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

Mainly because WoW is extremely well-balanced, has hardly different classes and PvP doesn't begin before level...~30.

And you know that the "proper" game for this 40k MMO won't start at level x because?

For all we know everything under level 10 will take place in our race's homeland, and orks are free until level 10. See how many things you're presuming?

I am presuming that they are not interested in balancing the game...based on an interview they gave.

You are presuming that they will balance it out...based on...hmmm.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Sure thing, but the article intoned that solo play would be a far more difficult slog then joining hands with everyone for some hippy drum circle or whatever it is you do in groups while the rest of us are being awesome and tearing demons faces in half on our own.

Personally, I take that as a challenge.

And we are on a pretty big forum, the members of which will probably form guilds when the game comes about. So at least you'll probably have access to teammates if you absolutely need them at some point.

Give the PTP Orks the things that are awesome regardless of how many boyz you've got with you- Cybork bodies, Powerklaws, warbikes, Shokk Attakk Guns, and plenty of auras. FTP players, especially those playing Orks, will group to anything flashy. Half of my MWO matches I just follow the guy with the Founder's mech because I know he's paying more than I am, and thus undoubtedly more hardcore. If he was actually giving me benefits, like a damage boost from an Iron gob, I'd run with him.

Make sure every paying mek can pack a KFF, and reduce dmg for those around them. Give them access to mighty Waaaghs, which are huge buffs only for those near them, and watch the Nobs assume their rightful place as leaders.

No, even better. Give the paying players the right to hit friendly Orks to maintain order. Establish the harsh bully society of the Orks, and drive them to be angry enough to assume positions of authority themselves!

I think we all need to realize that "balance" means so much more than just making sure each char is balanced with the others, it refers to many many more aspects of a game that just that.
He was very vague, he could have meant anything.

BryllCream wrote:Not sure about Imperial Guard, since ideally they'd get their own race. But it's a good idea otherwise, free cultists for CSMs, free scouts for Marines, free ??? for eldar.

Oh, I agree - I'm not sure how the Imperial Guard could be implemented better myself.
They could be a free "sub-faction" of the Marines whilst still maintaining the look and feel of an independent race, or they could be a full faction with their own pay-to-play elite troops. The problem I'm seeing is that the IG doesn't have much in terms of infantry on the level of Marines, which is why I was thinking about just combining the two.
Or perhaps it could be done like a "hybrid" of sorts? Here's your lasgun conscript for free. Want to play stronger infantry? Pay for Marines. Want to play stronger Guard? Pay for IG vehicles and carapace Storm Troopers. If they include an NPC mechanic they could even make you a squad leader and give you 5 AI guys to order around.

KalashnikovMarine wrote:Sure thing, but the article intoned that solo play would be a far more difficult slog then joining hands with everyone for some hippy drum circle or whatever it is you do in groups while the rest of us are being awesome and tearing demons faces in half on our own.

Mhmyeah, I'm sure there is a strong focus on PvP, it's pretty much the core aspect of the game. However, they did mention support roles such as mining and crafting - and, well, see Troike's post!

On a sidenote, on the Creative Developer's request I just sent him a huge list of GW SoB sources such as the various codices, rulebooks and WD/CJ issue numbers as well as links to archived official websites that had cool fluff on the Sisters. So at least now they have some more stuff to look through if they get around doing the Adepta Sororitas, and we have an even greater chance of seeing them being done properly.
I also asked if they may want to join the thread and talk about their game a bit, but let's see - I imagine they're rather busy, but perhaps they'll find a few minutes.

Imperial Guard don't have to go toe-to-toe with Space Marines. individually they may be weaker but with the right support/vehicles they could still match up as a whole. That does leave the problem of playing as an infantry guardsman and being pwned by just about everything all the time. Maybe they could have a super-fast respawn rate to compensate? That'd be pretty neat

Tanks! I'm sure people will be more then willing to be splated over and over if they get to drive a baneblade.

I want them to add Mechanicus. Give me my Warhound. :3

I have a solution for people who don't like what the free to play option offers......PAY FOR THE GAME just like every other game that you own and enjoy. Their plan is to ,are orks free so that there are more of hem and it will therefore balance with the more powerful space marines...if this doesn't work, they will change it! if the orks start o inherently weaker even when they're paying for the game, then we can consider this a hard mode of sorts...

it's shocking to me how entitled gamers are.

BryllCream wrote:Imperial Guard don't have to go toe-to-toe with Space Marines. individually they may be weaker but with the right support/vehicles they could still match up as a whole. That does leave the problem of playing as an infantry guardsman and being pwned by just about everything all the time. Maybe they could have a super-fast respawn rate to compensate? That'd be pretty neat

That's why I thought about PayGuard just being all about vehicles! But still it'd be amazing to have dozens or hundreds of (free) lasgun infantry rush into battle at their side.

Can't have Guard without infantry rushes. There is Only War!

BrotherVord wrote:it's shocking to me how entitled gamers are.

Welcome to the internets. :/

Aren't entitled gamers the norm now?

And while all the Ork and Marine players complain about how unfair everything is, the Eldar will sit back, take advantage of the chao-...disorder... and control everything. Just how it's meant to be!

BrotherVord wrote:
I have a solution for people who don't like what the free to play option offers......PAY FOR THE GAME just like every other game that you own and enjoy. Their plan is to ,are orks free so that there are more of hem and it will therefore balance with the more powerful space marines...if this doesn't work, they will change it! if the orks start o inherently weaker even when they're paying for the game, then we can consider this a hard mode of sorts...

it's shocking to me how entitled gamers are.

I think people would just play the other free games that don't unfairly punish free players rather then throwing money at a game that they aren't having fun in.

nomotog wrote:

BrotherVord wrote:
I have a solution for people who don't like what the free to play option offers......PAY FOR THE GAME just like every other game that you own and enjoy. Their plan is to ,are orks free so that there are more of hem and it will therefore balance with the more powerful space marines...if this doesn't work, they will change it! if the orks start o inherently weaker even when they're paying for the game, then we can consider this a hard mode of sorts...

it's shocking to me how entitled gamers are.

I think people would just play the other free games that don't unfairly punish free players rather then throwing money at a game that they aren't having fun in.

If you're not having fun in it, don't buy it. Or have you moved on from demanding that all games be free, to also demanding that all games be built to your own personal specifications? It's certainly a popular viewpoint in this thread

 BryllCream wrote:

nomotog wrote:

BrotherVord wrote:
I have a solution for people who don't like what the free to play option offers......PAY FOR THE GAME just like every other game that you own and enjoy. Their plan is to ,are orks free so that there are more of hem and it will therefore balance with the more powerful space marines...if this doesn't work, they will change it! if the orks start o inherently weaker even when they're paying for the game, then we can consider this a hard mode of sorts...

it's shocking to me how entitled gamers are.

I think people would just play the other free games that don't unfairly punish free players rather then throwing money at a game that they aren't having fun in.

If you're not having fun in it, don't buy it. Or have you moved on from demanding that all games be free, to also demanding that all games be built to your own personal specifications? It's certainly a popular viewpoint in this thread

You sure your not tilting windmills? Though no dua I'm not going to play for a game I don't have fun in. No one will. I said that in the very post you quoted. People don't play games that treat them poorly and this is a big problem in F2P games where more often then not people play before they pay for it. In an environment like that, you don't want to drive away your players before they get a chance to pay you.

That is why their payment plan is so bad because it will keep money out of their pockets. It's not me hating on the idea. It's an objectively bad idea that will have a very hard time competing among the better designed plans.

Edit: Normally this gets posted in every debate about F2P and microtransactions. I think we just forgot. http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/microtransactions

@ Lynata, in regard to your concerns about orks being too few or too many, supposedly the tyranids can be used to even things out, weather effects also were stated as a "balancing" tool.

There are a huge number of things I dont like about the details so far but I really dont think the guy deserves personal attacks.

Players basically in charge of other characters = fail

Microtransactions to buy crap = fail. In the interview, one of his examples was a player with a marine character that they had spent $200 on. WTF kind of nonsense is that? 200 dollars for bling and emotes?

Very little content for solo play = fail

Slow leveling for solo players = fail

Suppose you are an Eldar player and the "leader players" of your faction want to ally with chaos marines, you basically have to go along with them even if you think it is a stupid violation of the back ground.

If the battles are these large conflicts, where as he described the actions of individuals dont even amount to much, what is the challenge or fun in that.

A good MMORPG has a constant development of new content: items, new areas, quests, missions, alternative campaign scenarios, new jobs and it is reasonable to expect a monthly subscription fee to support ongoing development. This game doesnt really appear to emphasize any of those things. I dont mind a subscription fee if there is meaningful development going on.

Compared to MMORPG where you have races and jobs, this game appears to have races but one basic job type, warrior. That has fail written all over it.

I've read about the 'nids (and think this is a clever idea), I'm just not sure if that will be enough. I mean, the Tyranids will fight everyone, so in an area where they will actually be a nuisance to the Marines they will also be dangerous to the Orks, and vice versa. The only thing they can potentially do is draw away reinforcements and thus render certain flanks vulnerable to attack.

In a direct engagement between two factions, the 'nids won't be present (unless someone messed up or likes to live dangerously), so the numbers issue will be somewhat alleviated, but will it be enough? Time will tell.

Many of the "fails" you listed work out nicely in Planetside, by the way. And you'd be surprised how much cash some few people shell out for silly things. >_>

 Hollowman wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Yeah, but this d-bag says, specifically, that his company doesn't care about balance and they will not balance the game.

All we really know about the game so far is that one of the people involved is prone to saying stupid, flippant nonsense - doubtless considering it all very witty and edgy.

So ok, we know we have a game developer with no social skills. This is not a terrible shock. As to the actual game, we'll probably have something to talk about in about a year.

-D

Well, we also have their track record of games. Which is a very good indicator for future games. For example, we all know that Bioware will do a good job at producing RPGs and story-based games, Relic Entertainment excels at strategy games, Dice does FPS, etc. Even if the devs do a game outside of the "usual" for them, you trust them because they have the pedigree of their past games. Look at the past games of this developer, for the most part, they have majority failed to even hit 50% for their ratings. It's not a good track record, and I'm wondering why GW potentially bungled up such a huge potential income source by giving/selling the IP to them.

 Enigwolf wrote:

 Hollowman wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Yeah, but this d-bag says, specifically, that his company doesn't care about balance and they will not balance the game.

All we really know about the game so far is that one of the people involved is prone to saying stupid, flippant nonsense - doubtless considering it all very witty and edgy.

So ok, we know we have a game developer with no social skills. This is not a terrible shock. As to the actual game, we'll probably have something to talk about in about a year.

-D

Well, we also have their track record of games. Which is a very good indicator for future games. For example, we all know that Bioware will do a good job at producing RPGs and story-based games, Relic Entertainment excels at strategy games, Dice does FPS, etc. Even if the devs do a game outside of the "usual" for them, you trust them because they have the pedigree of their past games. Look at the past games of this developer, for the most part, they have majority failed to even hit 50% for their ratings. It's not a good track record, and I'm wondering why GW potentially bungled up such a huge potential income source by giving/selling the IP to them.

Well maybe they won the IP through a competitive bid or other developers were already busy with other projects or just not interested.

 BryllCream wrote:

And you know how long it will take, do you? You know that orks can't get to an equal footing with marine players by simply killing tyranids? You know that they won't be able to craft their way up?

No to all, nor did I claim to know, cease the straw man arguments immediately.

You seem to be imagining the worst possible game they could make, then deciding that's what they *are* making.

You seem to be imagining that I am far more emotionally invested in this game than I really am, lol.

Individual orks are inferior to a single space marine in the fluff, only at higher levels does it balance out (and indeed, swing the other way - though back into balance once you account for wargear). So the devs could either impliment this, while cleverly introducing them as a free-to-play race at lower levels, or they could piss over the fluff and have ork boys tearing through power armour with ease.

There actually are ways to do this effectively, best way I see to make Ork advancement faster than a Marine's for a few ranks, then slowing Ork progression to be more on a Marine's level when both characters would be of approximately equal strength.

If they don't do this though, there will be an issue of players being bored to fething tears playing an underpowered character for a while, and the hope of something stronger later will not be much of a comfort, especially all the Marine players who have been playing as long are still mightier one on one due to being ranked higher.

I have said multiple times that I could change my mind if promising information is released, but right now, based on current evidence, I don't really look forward to it. Why does that ail you so?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrotherVord wrote:
I have a solution for people who don't like what the free to play option offers......PAY FOR THE GAME just like every other game that you own and enjoy. Their plan is to ,are orks free so that there are more of hem and it will therefore balance with the more powerful space marines...if this doesn't work, they will change it! if the orks start o inherently weaker even when they're paying for the game, then we can consider this a hard mode of sorts...

it's shocking to me how entitled gamers are.

Nah I'm probably just not going to buy it.

The notion of paying a monthly fee on any game is inherently offensive to me. It would have to be quite the game for me to break that rule.

Also: I am going to wager a guess that most gamer's games don't consist of titles that you have to pay a monthly fee to play. That would be quite astonishing.

Also, what you fail to realize is that the statements about the Orkz? Applies to the p2p version as well, you don't magically start off stronger than the f2p people if you pay based on what has been said, you just can advance further. So, as I've said, you still start off weaker and without a balancing mechanic in the form of substantially quicker experience gain, the game will still be unbalanced.

That is of course based on what I have read so far, new context could mitigate my criticisms or even something could change after playtesting, but as it is now, that is how I see it.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rayvon wrote:
I dont think balance matters that much, if its enjoyable people will play, massive scale fps games are better balanced for groups of players too I think, rather than 1 v 1.
It seems that only recently in the past years since wow, that people have started banging on about balance all the time.

What makes you say that?

It might just be because I'm a longtime and avid fighting game player, but balance has always been a popular subject of debate among gaming in my experience.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Soladrin wrote:
I want them to add Mechanicus. Give me my Warhound. :3

I am admittedly very interested to see how they will balance Titans, if they are implemented.

All but the mightiest characters pale before even a Warhound.

Melissia wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:
Melissa can you provide a list of mmorpgs that were balanced on release?

Irrelevant. Most developers actually TRY to balance their games. Maybe not "perfect balance" since that's impossible while keeping complexity, but they certainly try to keep it so that, if they have multiple factions in pvp, each faction is capable of winning relatively equally with the others.

Guild Wars 2 is relatively balanced now, but it wasn't balanced when it was released-- they still tried to balance it though. They don't actively say "feth balance".

 Lynata wrote:
[snip]
If the Sisters really are amongst the first factions they'd like to add, this is certainly more than I had actually dared to hope for. I'll remain cautious, but let's see what the future holds!

I might even try it if they do. I doubt they will though.

It sounds like a cheap CYA cop-out though, compared to the statements they made earlier.

Balancing always has, and always will be an on going balancing act, as content is added/changed/removed and gaming styles/strategies constantly change and evolve so much the balancing to make sure the field of play is a level as possible, but lets face it there will always be cheeky strategies and douche moves, that's just the nature of gaming.

Truly a game will never be perfectly balanced, there's really no such thing as perfect, at least in the mortal realm, just the possibility to strive to get as close as we can, which is what good game developers do, these guys on the other hand, really seem like (from what I've heard thus far) to be the kind of guys all about the money, unhappy players a non existing thought to them so long as they aren't shoveling them money.

Enigwolf wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 JakeCWolf wrote:
So this ones going the "Freemium" route eh?

Well expect rampant power abuse and entire servers being owned by clans of deep pocked douche bags who throw hundreds of dollars to win every conflict...

I know paying to play sounds like a drag, but honestly if everyone is paying to play the game, that means everyone is starting on a level playing field, no amount of real life currency can help them win any one fight, only keep playing the game as whole.

Yeah, but this d-bag says, specifically, that his company doesn't care about balance and they will not balance the game.

Because imbalance makes people want to throw more money at the system to win. So, yeah, it's a pay-to-win game. At least he's being honest with it lol.

Well in that case I think the Chaos spawned whelps need to get banished back to the Immaterium that spawned them, and my powered armored boot heel will be happy to kick them back there via the nearest warp hole... Wow really let my inner Space Wolf out there didn't I? Just shows how much of a hair trigger I have to "Freemium" games, mark my words battle brothers and sisters, they will be the death of gaming one of these days, the last thing we need is another Gaming Dark Age like the one in the early 80s...

 Void__Dragon wrote:
I have said multiple times that I could change my mind if promising information is released, but right now, based on current evidence, I don't really look forward to it. Why does that ail you so?

Don't look at me, I'm wondering the same thing. Apparently criticizing a developer's stated goals and methods is eeeeevil and we should feel bad for doing it.

I don't, of course.

 Melissia wrote:
Don't look at me, I'm wondering the same thing. Apparently criticizing a developer's stated goals and methods is eeeeevil and we should feel bad for doing it.

I don't, of course.

Neither do I battle sister, neither do I. We are, after all, the fan base they are suppose to be making this game for, so it's our right to procrastinate and call them out on their cheeky marketing strategies if we so choose, on what basis we do this, fact, hearsay or otherwise is our business, and ours alone.

New update released:

http://overpower3d.com/Previews/warhammer-40k-eternal-crusade-details-revealed-1/

I'm liking the fact it's:

1. 4 Independent Races with Tyranids being the great equalizer between them.

2. Guilds get housing... in SPACE.

Need more updates for the future, but at least it's something.

 DemetriDominov wrote:
New update released:

http://overpower3d.com/Previews/warhammer-40k-eternal-crusade-details-revealed-1/

I'm liking the fact it's:

1. 4 Independent Races with Tyranids being the great equalizer between them.

2. Guilds get housing... in SPACE.

Need more updates for the future, but at least it's something.

Not a new update. That's all from the first interview.

nomotog wrote:

You sure your not tilting windmills? Though no dua I'm not going to play for a game I don't have fun in. No one will. I said that in the very post you quoted. People don't play games that treat them poorly and this is a big problem in F2P games where more often then not people play before they pay for it. In an environment like that, you don't want to drive away your players before they get a chance to pay you.

If you're going to assume that the game won't be fun then you may as well assume that the devs are all holocaust deniers. Actually there are some in this thread who probably do think that

That is why their payment plan is so bad because it will keep money out of their pockets.

Game devs make a game...people who're interested will buy it. How is that a bad payment plan?

It's not me hating on the idea. It's an objectively bad idea

Lol.

Edit: Normally this gets posted in every debate about F2P and microtransactions. I think we just forgot. http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/microtransactions

So this game is going to be bad...but pennyarcade is good? there's no accounting for taste, though I do salute your perseverance in sticking with a webcomic that doesn't even try to be funny.

 BryllCream wrote:
If you're going to assume that the game won't be fun then you may as well assume that the devs are all holocaust deniers. Actually there are some in this thread who probably do think that

We were talking about a silly video game and you bring up holocaust denying scum? wtf

 Minx wrote:

 BryllCream wrote:
If you're going to assume that the game won't be fun then you may as well assume that the devs are all holocaust deniers. Actually there are some in this thread who probably do think that

We were talking about a silly video game and you bring up holocaust denying scum? wtf

Well as long as people are simply making things up to attack the game/developers, they may as well call them holocaust deniers too. Hey I heard the devs for this game kick around puppies during their lunch breaks!

JWhex wrote:


Microtransactions to buy crap = fail. In the interview, one of his examples was a player with a marine character that they had spent $200 on. WTF kind of nonsense is that? 200 dollars for bling and

It's not that outlandish when you look at a game like WoW, most players have a main toon that they invest most of their time into...$200 is barely more than you would pay for a year of playing the game. They were referring to a player who was extremely advanced...if the game is good enough I wouldn't mind sinking $200 into it over a year long period or so...in fact I would love to be able to if the game was good enough to warrant it.

The trend for MMOs nowadays is moving towards the completely F2P (besides aesthetical/time microtransactions) or one-pay-to-unlock/play deal, like Guild Wars 2, Dust 514, World of Tanks, to name a few. Even Blizzard seems to be moving this direction with their Warcraft TCG online game that they're working on. Even relatively well-produced games like Star Wars: The Old Republic didn't survive long, and the only two monthly-pay MMOs that immediately come to mind that have been around for at least half a dozen years are WoW and Eve Online. I'll be somewhat surprised if this survives.

 BryllCream wrote:

nomotog wrote:

You sure your not tilting windmills? Though no dua I'm not going to play for a game I don't have fun in. No one will. I said that in the very post you quoted. People don't play games that treat them poorly and this is a big problem in F2P games where more often then not people play before they pay for it. In an environment like that, you don't want to drive away your players before they get a chance to pay you.

If you're going to assume that the game won't be fun then you may as well assume that the devs are all holocaust deniers. Actually there are some in this thread who probably do think that

That is why their payment plan is so bad because it will keep money out of their pockets.

Game devs make a game...people who're interested will buy it. How is that a bad payment plan?

It's not me hating on the idea. It's an objectively bad idea

Lol.

Edit: Normally this gets posted in every debate about F2P and microtransactions. I think we just forgot. http://penny-arcade.com/patv/episode/microtransactions

So this game is going to be bad...but pennyarcade is good? there's no accounting for taste, though I do salute your perseverance in sticking with a webcomic that doesn't even try to be funny.

Well I suspected before, but now I'm sure enough. Your not actually listening. This isn't a conversation that we are having.

I'd like to hear you explain why running around and shooting/bashing orks, eldar and marines is objectively bad.

 BryllCream wrote:
I'd like to hear you explain why running around and shooting/bashing orks, eldar and marines is objectively bad.

Because that is not what this game is offering to new players. Anyone who doesn't like running around as Ork cannon fodder getting killed by paying Space Marines and bossed around by paying Orks isn't going to stick around long enough to find out if the rest of the game is any better.

 BryllCream wrote:
I'd like to hear you explain why running around and shooting/bashing orks, eldar and marines is objectively bad.

I don't think anyone has said that that is their complaint. A few have said that they aren't interested in a mostly pvp game, but i don't think anyone's point is that the concept of the game they are making is bad. People are disappointed with the way the method of payment is being done, and other things being implemented. MMO's these days last for so much longer if they can draw in a huge, huge player base and make money on casual spending for vanity items and shortcuts, rather than "Pay to buy the game, then continue paying so you can play the game you already bought." You have to pay to even get started, and then you can only play as ork boyz who get stomped by other classes. So you have to shell out monthly payments just to keep up with other players and not be cannon-fodder in the game you already bought. And even if you pay monthly for said game, if you want to play orks you still have to work through the crappy ork boy-below-officer phase. Even if that phase is incredibly short, it's still unfair that you paid for the game like everyone else, but still start off weaker. The fact that they have stated that they need to try and enforce player faction population ratios to have a sort of balance between the factions on top of saying that they have no intention of balancing the game on release makes me think that it won't be fun to play unless you play the beardy classes in the most populated faction.

Also, when people ask for a decent f2p setup rather than a pay2win setup, they aren't being unrealistic and entitled. Plenty of games get by fantastically being entirely f2p in all the classes with all the game play options being free, and make their money on vanity items and shortcuts. It's not an mmo, but look at tf2. All classes are available from the start and all weapon options are available through random drops and crafting, but you can just go ahead and buy them if you don't feel like waiting for a drop or crafting it. Also, hats and badges and other accessories are available for purchase. Tf2 is thriving because of it.

I don't think it's likely, but would anyone else just love ork crafting. It could be so fun to have.

nomotog wrote:
I don't think it's likely, but would anyone else just love ork crafting. It could be so fun to have.

Why'd it be unlikely? Course Orks'll get crafting. They can't give a core gameplay mechanic like that to just one race.

As stated before: you either earn money by having unfair payment systems (aka Pay-to-Win) or by having an extremely good game to keep people playing and only add cosmetic stuff for low prices.

League of Legends, DotA, Team Fortress 2...all extremely good and well-designed games. Very successful games. Also financially.

Check the games the developer used to make before. Bunch of movie-tie-in cash grabs and poor quality shovelware. What are exactly are we to expect? I expect a very poor spinoff and low quality with an unfair pay system. Mark my words.

 Sigvatr wrote:
I expect a very poor spinoff and low quality with an unfair pay system. Mark my words.

That mirrors my expectations :(
In other words we've got to wait another two to four years until we might hear about a great 40k game. Yay!

I think we'll hear about a successor to DoW2 or Space Marine before then at least.

 Melissia wrote:
I think we'll hear about a successor to DoW2 or Space Marine before then at least.

Yes, you are right. In my despair i forgot about those.

Edit: Thankfully Behaviour Interactive only got the MMO licence, didn't they?

 DemetriDominov wrote:
New update released:

http://overpower3d.com/Previews/warhammer-40k-eternal-crusade-details-revealed-1/

I'm liking the fact it's:

1. 4 Independent Races with Tyranids being the great equalizer between them.

2. Guilds get housing... in SPACE.

Need more updates for the future, but at least it's something.

Thats actually increasingly promising, most MMO's spend way too much resources making content, if they just focus on combat, they could get it somewhat right. I just want to drive a fully loaded rhino or land raider with halo 1 madness physics and drop off squads of dudes into combat.

I hope that we dont see convoluted "classes" and the fights contain suitable levels of npc trash, guardsmen, grots, whatever, you dont feel like a big powerful terminator or whatever unless you're wading through crowds of cowerdly jackholes

 Melissia wrote:
I think we'll hear about a successor to DoW2 or Space Marine before then at least.

Just remember that THQ got its assets dismantled when they went bankrupt. Relic Entertainment, which made both DoW games, is now under Sega. No one announced if the license that they used for the DoW games went with Relic to Sega or not, but GW ultimately controls the license. Relic did announce that there was a possibility of it though, and before THQ went bankrupt, their boss announced that DoW3 was on the drawing boards.

Edit: Found this little snippet http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/04/23/warhammer-40000-dawn-of-war-may-return

 BryllCream wrote:

If you're going to assume that the game won't be fun then you may as well assume that the devs are all holocaust deniers.

Well no, because the former is based off of evidence from the developer's interviews, whereas the latter is you not having anything substantial to say so you engage in ad hominems.

I guess not everyone in this thread did catch the part in the interview where they said "our game won't be fun". Granted, it was easy to miss.

It sounds like they got the model for this game well off. I hate Orks with a passion so locking me into paying to not play as Orks is very off putting.

Now I may not be a games designer but I feel this would have worked in favor for them:

Choose a starting race: CSM, SM, Orks, Eldar.

If the player wanted to play another faction then they had to buy a new Character slot: up to £5 at most I would say.

Progression wise I would like to see:

CSM:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM
CSM to CSM Champion

Then it splits off into 3 paths:

CSM Champ to Havoc
CSM Champ to Raptor
CSM Champ to Terminator

I mean I have now given a reason as to why to level through the same content 3 times, to change the end result.

Now I'm not familiar with SM, Orks or Eldar so not 100% how to progress for them.

I really feel that this 40K MMO would work well if it was developed similar to Planetside 2.

Now I may have missed things mentioned in this thread, I did skim read alot of it.

 johnscott10 wrote:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM

Only if this allowed for female CSMs.

 johnscott10 wrote:
Progression wise I would like to see:

CSM:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM
CSM to CSM Champion

Mook-level Cultists should not be PCs.

 Melissia wrote:

 johnscott10 wrote:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM

Only if this allowed for female CSMs.

I dont see why not, I mean surely there are some females who would happily bow to the forces of Chaos. Kinda hate the whole only female faction being SoB tbh.

EDIT: Helps if I add the quote.

 johnscott10 wrote:

Now I'm not familiar with SM, Orks or Eldar so not 100% how to progress for them.

Orks:

Start as one of da boyz ( shoota, slugga, loota, storm, stikkbomma ) -> survive fights, grow bigga -> Nob -> survive fights, grow bigga, kill current warboss -> Warboss

Special exceptions: Mekboy, Painboy, Weird Boy, Big Mek

Space Marines:

Initiate -> Scout -> Battle Brother ( tactical, assault, devastator ) -> Sergeant -> Captain -> Chapter Master

Special classes: Apothecary, Techmarine, Chaplain, Librarian

Eldar have their Warrior Aspects:

Dire Avengers, Howling Banshees, Striking scorpions, Fire Dragons, Dark Reapers, Swooping Hawks, Warp Spiders

Special classes: Harlequins, Farseer, Warlock, Spiritseer, Autarch

Edit: I'd have to consult the new eldar codex for specifics if needed. But to become a leader of a craftworld, the eldar must be a master of all the aspects.

 johnscott10 wrote:
It sounds like they got the model for this game well off. I hate Orks with a passion so locking me into paying to not play as Orks is very off putting.

Now I may not be a games designer but I feel this would have worked in favor for them:

Choose a starting race: CSM, SM, Orks, Eldar.

If the player wanted to play another faction then they had to buy a new Character slot: up to £5 at most I would say.

Progression wise I would like to see:

CSM:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM
CSM to CSM Champion

Then it splits off into 3 paths:

CSM Champ to Havoc
CSM Champ to Raptor
CSM Champ to Terminator

I mean I have now given a reason as to why to level through the same content 3 times, to change the end result.

Now I'm not familiar with SM, Orks or Eldar so not 100% how to progress for them.

I really feel that this 40K MMO would work well if it was developed similar to Planetside 2.

Now I may have missed things mentioned in this thread, I did skim read alot of it.

I would much more prefer this.

Best suggestion ive read actually to the current system of progression, rather than some of the trollish posts.

I would also like it to be like planetside 2, pick your faction and stick with it.

AWesker1976 wrote:

 johnscott10 wrote:

Now I'm not familiar with SM, Orks or Eldar so not 100% how to progress for them.

Orks:

Start as one of da boyz ( shoota, slugga, loota, storm, stikkbomma ) -> survive fights, grow bigga -> Nob -> survive fights, grow bigga, kill current warboss -> Warboss

Special exceptions: Mekboy, Painboy, Weird Boy, Big Mek

.

I wouldn't think that surviving the fight should be a goal for Ork players. Certainly, the game shouldn't reward it. A dead Ork turns into spores, and his genetic memory returns in a new Ork body- they are arguably the only race other than Tyranids, that have a fluffy reason for respawning. Instead, reward them for how much damage they can cause. Obviously, if they can survive they'll cause more damage, but if they see a wall go down every boy should be running to be in the first wave, not lurking until it is safe to sneak in and pick up a few more survival points to grow to Nob size.

 johnscott10 wrote:

Cultist Champion to CSM

Not to be a downer, but it wouldn't really make sense fluff-wise. Unless you play a cultist who is a young, male child, you can't become an Astartes. And having child PCs probably wouldn't happen, for obvious reasons.

Some sort of CSM initiate would make sense. Sorta like a Chaos equivilant to SM Scouts.

I'm not the best when it comes down to 40K fluff tbh.

It was really just a idea for something they could do in regards to choosing a faction other than "You are Ork, pay or be stuck as Ork"

Kinda nice to see people giving good feedback on essentially what was a two minute idea XD

 Melissia wrote:

 johnscott10 wrote:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM

Only if this allowed for female CSMs.

There is no such thing as a female chaos space marine.

In my opinion you would need to be okay wih either being a daemon of some kind, a female cultist/dark sorceress, or some other fluff-ok race...which probably does not include chaos sisters of battle.

you can't just obliterate fluff wherever you want because you can't identify with a male character...doing so detracts from the immersion of all of the other players who know that your character would never exist in the 40k fluff.

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 johnscott10 wrote:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM

Only if this allowed for female CSMs.

There is no such thing as a female chaos space marine.

In my opinion you would need to be okay wih either being a daemon of some kind, a female cultist/dark sorceress, or some other fluff-ok race...which probably does not include chaos sisters of battle.

you can't just obliterate fluff wherever you want because you can't identify with a male character...doing so detracts from the immersion of all of the other players who know that your character would never exist in the 40k fluff.

And why not? I'v seen plenty of games butcher fluff to include something to please some of their players. I mean surely it wouldn't be that hard to introduce more females into 40K, they get some DNA from Sob, replicate a geneseed from it then you have females who can do just as well as guys. Its probably the most hated area of 40K for me, theres very little female presence when there could be so much more. Unless I'm missing something very obvious.

BrotherVord wrote:
There is no such thing as a female chaos space marine.

And yet, it'd still be the only way I'd ever be convinced to actually play the faction (despite the rumors to the contrary, I actually respect certain SM chapters like Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or Salamanders... I don't have any of that for CSMs).

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 johnscott10 wrote:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM

Only if this allowed for female CSMs.

There is no such thing as a female chaos space marine.

In my opinion you would need to be okay wih either being a daemon of some kind, a female cultist/dark sorceress, or some other fluff-ok race...which probably does not include chaos sisters of battle.

you can't just obliterate fluff wherever you want because you can't identify with a male character...doing so detracts from the immersion of all of the other players who know that your character would never exist in the 40k fluff.

CSM are probably going to be a suasage-fest to keep things simple. And really, it wouldn't be fair to limit female characters to non-supersoldier roles. At the moment, looks like Eldar are the only source of female characters (note that one of the devs jokingly said that they were bringing "sexiness" to the game).

Yeah, I marked that comment as kind of odd and stupid as well, myself.

I don't really care about "sexiness", I just don't feel any desire to spend hundreds of hours roleplaying as a dude.

 johnscott10 wrote:

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 johnscott10 wrote:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM

Only if this allowed for female CSMs.

There is no such thing as a female chaos space marine.

In my opinion you would need to be okay wih either being a daemon of some kind, a female cultist/dark sorceress, or some other fluff-ok race...which probably does not include chaos sisters of battle.

you can't just obliterate fluff wherever you want because you can't identify with a male character...doing so detracts from the immersion of all of the other players who know that your character would never exist in the 40k fluff.

And why not? I'v seen plenty of games butcher fluff to include something to please some of their players. I mean surely it wouldn't be that hard to introduce more females into 40K, they get some DNA from Sob, replicate a geneseed from it then you have females who can do just as well as guys. Its probably the most hated area of 40K for me, theres very little female presence when there could be so much more. Unless I'm missing something very obvious.

Space Marines being male-only is pretty solidly set in stone. Really, the devs would be courting outnerdrage if they were to change something as fundamental as that.

But worry not, if all goes well we shall have a whole faction of badass females somewhere down the line. And if the sentiments expressed in the emails still ring true at that point, they'll be pretty awesome to play.

 Melissia wrote:

BrotherVord wrote:
There is no such thing as a female chaos space marine.

And yet, it'd still be the only way I'd ever be convinced to actually play the faction (despite the rumors to the contrary, I actually respect certain SM chapters like Space Wolves, Blood Angels, or Salamanders... I don't have any of that for CSMs).

That's fine if that's what it would take to get YOU to play, but it doesn't exist in fluff....like not even a little bit. Hopefully they have other options for the millions of females that I'm sure will want to play a warhammer 40k mmorpg....I just don't want them to be options that very blatantly break immersion.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 johnscott10 wrote:

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 johnscott10 wrote:
Custist to Cultist Champion
Cultist Champion to CSM

Only if this allowed for female CSMs.

There is no such thing as a female chaos space marine.

In my opinion you would need to be okay wih either being a daemon of some kind, a female cultist/dark sorceress, or some other fluff-ok race...which probably does not include chaos sisters of battle.

you can't just obliterate fluff wherever you want because you can't identify with a male character...doing so detracts from the immersion of all of the other players who know that your character would never exist in the 40k fluff.

And why not? I'v seen plenty of games butcher fluff to include something to please some of their players. I mean surely it wouldn't be that hard to introduce more females into 40K, they get some DNA from Sob, replicate a geneseed from it then you have females who can do just as well as guys. Its probably the most hated area of 40K for me, theres very little female presence when there could be so much more. Unless I'm missing something very obvious.

Because it is so fundamental. Look, I think they should be including sisters of battle as an option for a female version of the space marine classes...I would even be okay with them breaking the fluff by making them as strong as space marines...but I do not want to see a 7 foot tall woman in power armor that looks like a space marine with long hair and breasts. It simple doesn't exist in the fluff.

As far as I am concerned, they can write some lore for a chaos sisters of battle faction, but I think they should look like what the sisters look like, not what the space marines look like.

Am I correct in suspecting that these developers are fools? That is the impression I'm getting.

And since I would never play the faction anyway otherwise, I couldn't care less regardless. CSMs are just whiny little spiky-shouldered targets for everyone else to beat up for experience points anyway, we all know that

Jokes aside, they rather fethed up in their faction choices.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

BrotherVord wrote:
I would even be okay with them breaking the fluff by making them as strong as space marines

That's not "breaking the fluff". That's canon, in GW's own words Sisters are equals in the field of battle to Space Marines.

BrotherVord wrote:
[As far as I am concerned, they can write some lore for a chaos sisters of battle faction

Nah. That's would also be a major departure from the fluff. Nothing like that exists in the 40K canon.

But, from what he said about the factions, the SoB could form a temporary alliance with the CSM. Majorly incompatible with the fluff, but just a natural consequence of that mechanic.

 Melissia wrote:
And since I would never play the faction anyway otherwise, I couldn't care less regardless. CSMs are just whiny little spiky-shouldered targets for everyone else to beat up for experience points anyway, we all know that

Jokes aside, they rather fethed up in their faction choices.

What do you mean space marines, CSM, Orks and eldar are some of the most popular factions I would be more surprised if they used sisters, tau, necrons and daemons instead?

 johnscott10 wrote:


And why not? I'v seen plenty of games butcher fluff to include something to please some of their players. I mean surely it wouldn't be that hard to introduce more females into 40K, they get some DNA from Sob, replicate a geneseed from it then you have females who can do just as well as guys. Its probably the most hated area of 40K for me, theres very little female presence when there could be so much more. Unless I'm missing something very obvious.

I'd rather not see that happening at all. Those would be the most manly man females to ever been existed!
I mean have you ever seen joke images like this... http://www.terrariaonline.com/attachments/touhou-dan807090-jpg.12625/ They'd look like that. I mean who wants to play that as a female. The sheer horror.

Popular amongst 40k players. But an MMO needs a larger audience than just "40k Players who have decent computers, a decent internet connection, money to spend on a game subscription, and are PC gamers" to thrive.

 Melissia wrote:
Popular amongst 40k players. But an MMO needs a larger audience than just "40k Players who have decent computers, money to spend on a game subscription, and are PC gamers" to thrive.

I suppose, although I think they should have replaced CSM with either guard (who are a popular faction), dark eldar or sisters (who aren't so popular) as the female options are limited atm and CSM run the risk of just being reskinned space marines.

Of course CSMs ru nthe risk of being reskinned Space Marines. That's basically all they are in the lore, too-- a Space Marine who worships Chaos, a renegade Space Marine, a Space Marine from the Traitor Legions, etc. They're really not that different from "regular" Space Marines. Especially not to an outsider.

 Melissia wrote:
Of course CSMs ru nthe risk of being reskinned Space Marines. That's basically all they are in the lore, too-- a Space Marine who worships Chaos, a renegade Space Marine, a Space Marine from the Traitor Legions, etc. They're really not that different from "regular" Space Marines.

I suppose, but they could distinguish CSM with demonic options or allowing Khorne Beserkers, Plague Marines, Rubric Marines, Noise Marines, Possessed, etc as classes.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I suppose but they could distinguish CSM with demonic options or allowing Khorne Beserkers, Plague Marines, Rubric Marines, Noise Marines, Possessed, etc.

Of those, the only ones that are actually anywhere near unique among Space Marine units are the Possessed. And they'd be very, very difficult to implement in a fashion that is accurate to the lore.

The others are just "foot assault marines who are angry", "durable tactical marines with a few toys", "sorcerer-led tactical marines with special ammo", and "devastator marines with slightly different weapons".

In my not very humble opinion, Chaos Space Marine faction should be converted to just Chaos and allow for people to choose from the following:

Traitor IG, Chaos Daemons, Dark Mechanicum, Chaos Marines

It would give people who like Chaos more options rather than being "Space Marine with more skulls"

The same could be said for Space Marines, change them to Imperium of Man.

IG, Sisters, Mechanicum, Inquisition, Marines

Edit to add: a possessed could work like the Marauder from warhammer online. with different stances to represent different mutations = daemonic powers. Then again I hated stance dancing.

Yes, that would have been the smart thing to do.

AWesker1976 wrote:
In my not very humble opinion, Chaos Space Marine faction should be converted to just Chaos and allow for people to choose from the following:

Traitor IG, Chaos Daemons, Dark Mechanicum, Chaos Marines

It would give people who like Chaos more options rather than being "Space Marine with more skulls"

The same could be said for Space Marines, change them to Imperium of Man.

IG, Sisters, Mechanicum, Inquisition, Marines

IG and traitor IG are a bit too squishy imo...unless they were storm troopers. Then maybe it would work.

Other than that, I like this idea.

AWesker1976 wrote:
In my not very humble opinion, Chaos Space Marine faction should be converted to just Chaos and allow for people to choose from the following:

Traitor IG, Chaos Daemons, Dark Mechanicum, Chaos Marines

It would give people who like Chaos more options rather than being "Space Marine with more skulls"

The same could be said for Space Marines, change them to Imperium of Man.

IG, Sisters, Mechanicum, Inquisition, Marines

This is too sensible of an idea although IG and cultists would be underpowered so scrap them or make them part of the gakky f2p model.

 Melissia wrote:
Yes, that would have been the smart thing to do.

Sadly, as I noted before, the devs in charge of the game appear to be fools.

 Melissia wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
I suppose but they could distinguish CSM with demonic options or allowing Khorne Beserkers, Plague Marines, Rubric Marines, Noise Marines, Possessed, etc.

Of those, the only ones that are actually anywhere near unique among Space Marine units are the Possessed. And they'd be very, very difficult to implement in a fashion that is accurate to the lore.

The others are just "foot assault marines who are angry", "durable tactical marines with a few toys", "sorcerer-led tactical marines with special ammo", and "devastator marines with slightly different weapons".

Sigh, you're probably right I quit the table top games years ago so I'll take your word on it.

 Cheesecat wrote:
This is too sensible of an idea although IG and cultists would be underpowered so scrap them or make them part of the gakky f2p model.

Wouldn't have been too hard to have the following:

Imperium of Man:
Frontline: Marines
Specialist: Sisters
Psykers: Inquisition
Grunts: Imperial Guard

Forces of Chaos:
Frontline: Marines
Specialists: Mutants
Psykers: Daemonhosts
Grunts: Traitor Guard

The Ork WAAAGH:
Frontline: Nobz
Specialists: Mekboyz
Psykers: Wyrdboyz
Grunts: Boyz

The Craftworld Eldar:
Frontline: Aspect Warriors
Specialists: Warseers*
Psykers: Farseers
Grunts: Guardians

Giving each faction a good balance of "classes" and allowing free to play players to play grunts of any faction. The only one I wasn't sure about was the Eldar.

 Melissia wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
This is too sensible of an idea although IG and cultists would be underpowered so scrap them or make them part of the gakky f2p model.

Wouldn't have been too hard to have the following:

Imperium of Man:
Frontline: Marines
Specialist: Sisters
Psykers: Inquisition
Grunts: Imperial Guard

Forces of Chaos:
Frontline: Marines
Specialists: Mutants
Psykers: Daemonhosts
Grunts: Traitor Guard

The Ork WAAAGH:
Frontline: Nobz
Specialists: Mekboyz
Psykers: Wyrdboyz
Grunts: Boyz

The Craftworld Eldar:
Frontline: Aspect Warriors
Specialists: Warseers*
Psykers: Farseers
Grunts: Guardians

Giving each faction a good balance of "classes" and allowing free to play players to play grunts of any faction. The only one I wasn't sure about was the Eldar.

That sounds great the only corrections I would make is replace traitor guard with cultists and mutants with daemons.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and the eldar specialist could be harlequins instead.

Wait... I may be mistaken here but isn't there a BL story where a female cultist is transformed into a CSM?

Also, isn't there the odd piece of fluff that Fabius Bile is working on ways to open up CSM creation processes to everyone? Young, old, Male and Female?

Also, couldn't you handwave it and say Chaos did it?

 Kettu wrote:
Wait... I may be mistaken here but isn't there a BL story where a female cultist is transformed into a CSM?

Also, isn't there the odd piece of fluff that Fabius Bile is working on ways to open up CSM creation processes to everyone? Young, old, Male and Female?

Also, couldn't you handwave it and say Chaos did it?

The devs did say their game "doesn't exist" in the overall lore of 40K, so they could do that.

They just would have to be ok with the game never being considered "canon" by GW standards, but I could live with that.

 Kettu wrote:
Wait... I may be mistaken here but isn't there a BL story where a female cultist is transformed into a CSM?

Perhaps. But keep in mind, BL authors are allowed to take liberties with the fluff.

 Kettu wrote:
Also, isn't there the odd piece of fluff that Fabius Bile is working on ways to open up CSM creation processes to everyone? Young, old, Male and Female?

Yes, but he has not yet been successful. And it'd probably too major a plot-advancement to be carried out by a third-party product.

 Kettu wrote:
Also, couldn't you handwave it and say Chaos did it?

That's quite a weak explanation, though. And if you've got a story where Chaos is able to make anybody into a CSM, why wouldn't they have done it elsewhere?

There's a BL story where a female IG member is possessed and puts on CSM armor and proceeds to stomp stupid amounts of Iron Warrior donkey before vanishing into the warp, is that what you mean?

You could hand wave it by having your Chaos progression track depend on the ruinous power you select during character creation, if you go Slaneesh you'll unlock a slider that will let you be male, female, or somewhere in between features wise.

 Kettu wrote:
Also, couldn't you handwave it and say Chaos did it?

Troike : That's quite a weak explanation, though. And if you've got a story where Chaos is able to make anybody into a CSM, why wouldn't they have done it elsewhere?

I'm going to ignore the fact that that exists, for the sake of keeping this thread on topic.

AWesker1976 wrote:

 Troike wrote:

 Kettu wrote:
Also, couldn't you handwave it and say Chaos did it?

That's quite a weak explanation, though. And if you've got a story where Chaos is able to make anybody into a CSM, why wouldn't they have done it elsewhere?

There's always the http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Daemonculaba

I suppose if they were really desperate to have female CSMs, that would be an option. But again, if we've got an instance where it's being used in a major conflict and on vast swathes of cultists, it'd seem odd that Chaos is only deploying it there.

But whatever. If they really want to crowbar female CSMs in (though they've said nothing about this) I wouldn't boycott it or anything. It'd be out of place in the wider lore, but not something I'd rage about.

They definently need to scrounge up some female options somewhere though.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
They definently need to scrounge up some female options somewhere though.

And they need to stop acting like the only reason people want female characters is so that they can have "sexy" characters...

In theory, of course there's room for female or even shemale CSM. "Slaanesh did it" <- there's your explanation. That being said, it would probably look odd if those were to become a common sight, and I really don't think that such a feature would rank highly in any developer's list of priorities. This franchise is dominated by 2 meter white male superhumans in powered armour, and since this is not going to change any time soon (which has nothing to do with the developers of Eternal Crusade), the only options are to either deal with it or look for something else, instead of continuously complaining that not everybody can do anything. As long as other factions have some more complexity and allow for greater customisation, I would instead focus on those rather than wasting countless hours on typing up intricate statements of grievance about thematic aspects of the entire franchise every single time said aspects influence a product. It's perfectly fine to state this ugly truth every once in a while, but it is not productive to do so all the time in an effort to seed negativity. It's not going to catch on if it did not work after the first few times it was posted, and it won't change anything about the status quo.

We should probably be fortunate that this game will at least feature more than just SM vs CSM, as was the case with Space Marine's (the game) multiplayer mode (given that it should not have been too hard to let people play Orks or IG there as well, as most of the necessary assets were already made).
Let's just see if Orks and Eldar are any fun (I certainly think they have the potential), and if the devs hold true to their statement to add more races later.

AWesker1976 wrote:The devs did say their game "doesn't exist" in the overall lore of 40K, so they could do that.
They just would have to be ok with the game never being considered "canon" by GW standards, but I could live with that.

Since there is no such thing as a uniform, consistent canon for 40k, this really is a non-issue.
GW occasionally denies stuff that is too far from the general "look and feel" of the setting (in which case the game simply would not be greenlighted for release), but as we should all know (and as Gav Thorpe explained), there is ample room for deviations and contradictions.

To be honest, I'm not really seeing the issue with there being a lack of female characters. It's in keeping with most of the factions they've chosen, which are the most popular and (more importantly) most recognizable ones in the brand. Most multiplayer shooters don't give the option, and this is much more of an MMO shooter than an MMORPG. They're planning on adding Sisters in later, great! But you're blowing this issue a little out of proportion here.

 Melissia wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
This is too sensible of an idea although IG and cultists would be underpowered so scrap them or make them part of the gakky f2p model.

Wouldn't have been too hard to have the following:

Imperium of Man:
Frontline: Marines
Specialist: Sisters
Psykers: Inquisition
Grunts: Imperial Guard

Forces of Chaos:
Frontline: Marines
Specialists: Mutants
Psykers: Daemonhosts
Grunts: Traitor Guard

The Ork WAAAGH:
Frontline: Nobz
Specialists: Mekboyz
Psykers: Wyrdboyz
Grunts: Boyz

The Craftworld Eldar:
Frontline: Aspect Warriors
Specialists: Warseers*
Psykers: Farseers
Grunts: Guardians

Giving each faction a good balance of "classes" and allowing free to play players to play grunts of any faction. The only one I wasn't sure about was the Eldar.

This doesn't work...you're pigeonholing people way too much with this. There are bound to be people who want to play as sisters of battle but don't want to play support roles or "specialists". Same goes for every other class, especially the imperial and chaos ones. I feel like you are throwing out your opinions on what would make YOUR perfect gaming experience without considering the fact that other people will be playing this game.

 Melissia wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
They definently need to scrounge up some female options somewhere though.

And they need to stop acting like the only reason people want female characters is so that they can have "sexy" characters...

Also true, either way if they want to make a sustainable MMO female options are a must.

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
This is too sensible of an idea although IG and cultists would be underpowered so scrap them or make them part of the gakky f2p model.

Wouldn't have been too hard to have the following:

Imperium of Man:
Frontline: Marines
Specialist: Sisters
Psykers: Inquisition
Grunts: Imperial Guard

Forces of Chaos:
Frontline: Marines
Specialists: Mutants
Psykers: Daemonhosts
Grunts: Traitor Guard

The Ork WAAAGH:
Frontline: Nobz
Specialists: Mekboyz
Psykers: Wyrdboyz
Grunts: Boyz

The Craftworld Eldar:
Frontline: Aspect Warriors
Specialists: Warseers*
Psykers: Farseers
Grunts: Guardians

Giving each faction a good balance of "classes" and allowing free to play players to play grunts of any faction. The only one I wasn't sure about was the Eldar.

This doesn't work...you're pigeonholing people way too much with this. There are bound to be people who want to play as sisters of battle but don't want to play support roles or "specialists". Same goes for every other class, especially the imperial and chaos ones. I feel like you are throwing out your opinions on what would make YOUR perfect gaming experience without considering the fact that other people will be playing this game.

I take it you've never played an MMORPG before as almost all of them involve classes designed for a specific role during combat.

Specialist doesn't mean support role, in this case.

 Melissia wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
They definently need to scrounge up some female options somewhere though.

And they need to stop acting like the only reason people want female characters is so that they can have "sexy" characters...

What's worse is the "sexy" female characters are rarely attractive...

We need more sexy male characters.

 Cheesecat wrote:

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
This is too sensible of an idea although IG and cultists would be underpowered so scrap them or make them part of the gakky f2p model.

Wouldn't have been too hard to have the following:

Imperium of Man:
Frontline: Marines
Specialist: Sisters
Psykers: Inquisition
Grunts: Imperial Guard

Forces of Chaos:
Frontline: Marines
Specialists: Mutants
Psykers: Daemonhosts
Grunts: Traitor Guard

The Ork WAAAGH:
Frontline: Nobz
Specialists: Mekboyz
Psykers: Wyrdboyz
Grunts: Boyz

The Craftworld Eldar:
Frontline: Aspect Warriors
Specialists: Warseers*
Psykers: Farseers
Grunts: Guardians

Giving each faction a good balance of "classes" and allowing free to play players to play grunts of any faction. The only one I wasn't sure about was the Eldar.

This doesn't work...you're pigeonholing people way too much with this. There are bound to be people who want to play as sisters of battle but don't want to play support roles or "specialists". Same goes for every other class, especially the imperial and chaos ones. I feel like you are throwing out your opinions on what would make YOUR perfect gaming experience without considering the fact that other people will be playing this game.

I take it you've never played an MMORPG before as almost all of them involve classes designed for a specific role during combat.

I see it as a bit constricting for the Imperium, personally. Guard would just be represented by regular troopers, and one might have as many options for their Marine or SoB if they're put into specific roles like that.

 Melissia wrote:
Specialist doesn't mean support role.

Ideally, I'd still prefer they get their own faction, though. They're certainly at their best when they're not having to share the spotlight with anybody.

The fact that there does not appear to be a variety of job classes suggests to me that there will be very limited tactics. Having a group, with a tank, DD, buffer and other support requires team work and some strategy.

This game sounds like the Final Fantasy XI equivalent of, "Hey lets get a bunch of warrior/ninjas and just zerg rush it."

Anyway, some people actually enjoy playing a support role but they wont be playing this game.

Having their own faction would present some interesting challenges to the 4-way war setup they have going. It wouldn't make too much sense for the Marines and Sisters to be at war with each other, so having them under one "Imperium" faction makes much more sense.

JWhex wrote:
The fact that there does not appear to be a variety of job classes suggests to me that there will be very limited tactics.

It's sad really. I mean the Battlefield series makes classes work for it, and it's also a shooter...

 MandalorynOranj wrote:
Having their own faction would present some interesting challenges to the 4-way war setup they have going. It wouldn't make too much sense for the Marines and Sisters to be at war with each other, so having them under one "Imperium" faction makes much more sense.

It wouldn't be too unrealistic from a fluff standpoint. Sisters are already distrustful of Marines, and it would be fairly simple to just say that they have differing goals, and may come into conflict as a result of this.

Soulstorm's justification could work. The Sisters see the place as tainted by Chaos and decide to purge anybody who doesn't submit themselves to Ecclesiarchial (or Inquisitorial) authority.

An easy way out would, of course, also be to simply make Space Marines and Battle Sisters share the same faction and the same classes - in essence, only featuring a visual difference, like "skins". Their organisation and wargear are similar enough, and the Marines' +1 in genetic enhancements would be compensated by simply saying that the Sisters' faith gives them an equal boost. Which is close to what GW once said on their homepage, anyways.
Granted, you'd lose out on the rather interesting mechanic that the Sisters are normally somewhat less capable, yet can use AoF to temporarily catapult themselves above and beyond the Marines, but .. hey, it'd be an easy solution that does not afford much resources other than making the models and textures.

Of course I'd still prefer to have that above-mentioned "bell curve" effect of the Acts of Faith (which have potential to be an interesting mechanic in an MMO), not to mention a greater focus on the small but notable differences that do exist (such as the Seraphim being somewhat more about ranged combat than close, whilst with Assault Marines it's the other way around).

Can anyone provide me with the dev's email? Because they were so responsive last time, I want to ask some questions.

With that four class system, why would anyone want to play the IG?

Oh, and feel free to share the dev's email, let's all barrage them with our concerns of being let down for a third time.

 DemetriDominov wrote:
With that four class system, why would anyone want to play the IG?

Because that's the class that's free to play for the Imperium of Man.

So if I [a.k.a several million next gen gamers] buy a $70.00 next gen game that's going to all consoles to begin with..... again... what's the point?

 DemetriDominov wrote:
So if I [a.k.a several million next gen gamers] buy a $70.00 next gen game that's going to all consoles to begin with..... again... what's the point?

I don't have an answer for that, but keep in mind, I'm just using the same free to play system that the devs have already outlined. They're already apparently committed to this-- Ork Boyz are the only thing F2P players can play, and Space Marines are stated to be five times as strong as an Ork Boy.

How that will translate in to console gaming I don't know.

 Cheesecat wrote:

BrotherVord wrote:

 Melissia wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:
This is too sensible of an idea although IG and cultists would be underpowered so scrap them or make them part of the gakky f2p model.

Wouldn't have been too hard to have the following:

Imperium of Man:
Frontline: Marines
Specialist: Sisters
Psykers: Inquisition
Grunts: Imperial Guard

Forces of Chaos:
Frontline: Marines
Specialists: Mutants
Psykers: Daemonhosts
Grunts: Traitor Guard

The Ork WAAAGH:
Frontline: Nobz
Specialists: Mekboyz
Psykers: Wyrdboyz
Grunts: Boyz

The Craftworld Eldar:
Frontline: Aspect Warriors
Specialists: Warseers*
Psykers: Farseers
Grunts: Guardians

Giving each faction a good balance of "classes" and allowing free to play players to play grunts of any faction. The only one I wasn't sure about was the Eldar.

This doesn't work...you're pigeonholing people way too much with this. There are bound to be people who want to play as sisters of battle but don't want to play support roles or "specialists". Same goes for every other class, especially the imperial and chaos ones. I feel like you are throwing out your opinions on what would make YOUR perfect gaming experience without considering the fact that other people will be playing this game.

I take it you've never played an MMORPG before as almost all of them involve classes designed for a specific role during combat.

Everquest, Star Wars galaxies, eve, world of Warcraft, warhammer online, lord of the rings online, planet side, city of heroes, dc universe online....did I miss any?

I know how classes work, there's a difference between a class that has various options, ie a warlock speccing for damage or support, and telling people "oh you're a space marine? To the front lines with you!" It's overly simplistic and not very well thought out.

 Melissia wrote:

 DemetriDominov wrote:
So if I [a.k.a several million next gen gamers] buy a $70.00 next gen game that's going to all consoles to begin with..... again... what's the point?

I don't have an answer for that, but keep in mind, I'm just using the same free to play system that the devs have already outlined. They're already apparently committed to this-- Ork Boyz are the only thing F2P players can play, and Space Marines are stated to be five times as strong as an Ork Boy.

How that will translate in to console gaming I don't know.

I need this reference. Would you be so kind as to link it? There is clearly news that I am not aware of and it scares me because I'm starting to not like this compromise these guys are considering.....

 Lynata wrote:
An easy way out would, of course, also be to simply make Space Marines and Battle Sisters share the same faction and the same classes - in essence, only featuring a visual difference, like "skins".

No.

Where the f*** is tau???? Bulllsh*t!!!! What A**HOLES!!!!!

 Melissia wrote:
Wouldn't have been too hard to have the following:

Imperium of Man:
Frontline: Marines
Specialist: Sisters
Psykers: Inquisition
Grunts: Imperial Guard

Forces of Chaos:
Frontline: Marines
Specialists: Mutants
Psykers: Daemonhosts
Grunts: Traitor Guard

The Ork WAAAGH:
Frontline: Nobz
Specialists: Mekboyz
Psykers: Wyrdboyz
Grunts: Boyz

The Craftworld Eldar:
Frontline: Aspect Warriors
Specialists: Warseers*
Psykers: Farseers
Grunts: Guardians

Giving each faction a good balance of "classes" and allowing free to play players to play grunts of any faction. The only one I wasn't sure about was the Eldar.

It's a cool idea, but it doesn't take into account areas where the differing classes might mix.

Space Marine Librarians for example.

We're getting awfully worked up over a game that hasn't hit alpha yet, and in all probability won't see release. If it does, it's going to be an MMOTPS.

I think people need to realize that about a tiny portion of the game has been discussed and nothing confirmed. At this stage of development anything can change, they haven't even got an engine for the game yet

We already know that. That doesn't mean that we can't comment on the crap that's been vomited out so far.

MadMuzza wrote:
I think people need to realize that about a tiny portion of the game has been discussed and nothing confirmed. At this stage of development anything can change, they haven't even got an engine for the game yet

Which it hopefully will, because so far they're not describing a particularly fun game.

MadMuzza wrote:
I think people need to realize that about a tiny portion of the game has been discussed and nothing confirmed. At this stage of development anything can change, they haven't even got an engine for the game yet

We know, lol.

I've said that multiple times, but I'm a loser who likes to talk about dumb gak and speculate about dumb gak like this, so I will continue to do so, and for once I am actually being on-topic.

 Laughing Man wrote:
Which it hopefully will, because so far they're not describing a particularly fun game.

Eh. I believe judging an MMO before it hits beta is a pretty pointless exercise. You have crazy no-name studios making MMOs that somehow find success and endure (EVE), and then you have can't miss IP in the hands of can't miss developers with crazy amounts of money behind them that end up tanking (TOR).

AWesker1976 wrote:

 Kettu wrote:
Also, couldn't you handwave it and say Chaos did it?

Troike : That's quite a weak explanation, though. And if you've got a story where Chaos is able to make anybody into a CSM, why wouldn't they have done it elsewhere?

There's always the http://wh40k.lexicanum.com/wiki/Daemonculaba

Edit to credit Troike with quote

Holy poo, is this canon? O_o


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Seaward wrote:

 Laughing Man wrote:
Which it hopefully will, because so far they're not describing a particularly fun game.

Eh. I believe judging an MMO before it hits beta is a pretty pointless exercise. You have crazy no-name studios making MMOs that somehow find success and endure (EVE), and then you have can't miss IP in the hands of can't miss developers with crazy amounts of money behind them that end up tanking (TOR).

Mostly because it's just stupid to have a fully-voiced MMO when people don't even read the quest text.

 Sigvatr wrote:
Mostly because it's just stupid to have a fully-voiced MMO when people don't even read the quest text.

Perhaps, but plenty of other well-funded MMOs with lots of hype and proven developers have tanked.

 Seaward wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:
Mostly because it's just stupid to have a fully-voiced MMO when people don't even read the quest text.

Perhaps, but plenty of other well-funded MMOs with lots of hype and proven developers have tanked.

Yep, mostly because most of them tried to hop on the WoW bandwagon and then failed....and in this case...regarding their previous products, they are FAR, FAAAAR from being able to stem a MMORPG project.

Well, they're not really making an MMORPG. They're making an MMOTPS, which is still extremely ambitious, but I feel like a lot of complaints here are based on wanting this to be an RPG, when it's clearly not supposed to be.

A lot of the complaints are based on the BS design decisions they made early on as mentioned in between "there is only war!" in the first interviews.
.

MandalorynOranj wrote:]Well, they're not really making an MMORPG. They're making an MMOTPS, which is still extremely ambitious, but I feel like a lot of complaints here are based on wanting this to be an RPG, when it's clearly not supposed to be.

QFT. It would probably be better to regard it similar to, uh ... something like APB, I guess?
That said, they are throwing an awful lot of social elements in there, with planned features such as crafting or housing, so there is obviously some overlap.

Sigvatr wrote:Holy poo, is this canon? O_o

No, it's one of the "tens of thousands of overlapping realities in the imaginations of games developers, writers, readers and gamers".

I expect it to be Warrock / Brick Force / whatever F2P FPS there is out there right now with a P2W scheme and slapped on 40k models. Tadaa.

As far as inner class specialization is concerned (Chaplin's Librarians, ect.) a talent/skill system would go great with this game. Each class has it's own niche, but then can be stretched into a different role depending on how you spec. A standard SM' will always beat out virtually any other class in a frontline melee capability, but a SoB can become more resilient, an IG can become more adept in gurrellia warfare, so on and so forth.

Dear Fans, The Eternal Crusade Team and I are reading all your post and taking your feedback seriously. We love you all even the Tr.. (''); ... heuu! I mean the Orcs!!

;-)

See you on the battlefield! and please keep telling us the good and the bad about YOUR game. Eternal Crusade.

and for the Heretics that still dont believe in either the Team, The Game or Behaviour... I only have one thing left to tell you:

The Emperor will not judge you by your medals and diplomas but by your scars.

Regards

Miguel
Your Studio Head Behaviour Online

We have been found.. quick, hide the loot.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

miguelcaron wrote:
Dear Fans, The Eternal Crusade Team and I are reading all your post and taking your feedback seriously. We love you all even the Tr.. (''); ... heuu! I mean the Orcs!!

;-)

See you on the battlefield! and please keep telling us the good and the bad about YOUR game. Eternal Crusade.

and for the Heretics that still dont believe in either the Team, The Game or Behaviour... I only have one thing left to tell you:

The Emperor will not judge you by your medals and diplomas but by your scars.

Regards

Miguel
Your Studio Head Behaviour Online

On a more serious note, do you happen to have a twitter handle we could follow for quicky updates along the way?

miguelcaron wrote:
Dear Fans, The Eternal Crusade Team and I are reading all your post and taking your feedback seriously. We love you all even the Tr.. (''); ... heuu! I mean the Orcs!!
[...]
Miguel
Your Studio Head Behaviour Online

Don't worry. I'm not trying to troll you despite what certain people have claimed. I'm just expressing my honest reaction to what has been released.

I likewise would like a twitter handle. It'd be easier to keep up that way since this thread will eventually die out over the course of the next two to three years

Or next week depending on the flow of new info.

Oh cool, the devs are here. Always nice to have some feedback from the devs themselves.

Does that mean they are going to drop the current model?

As an aside, to the devs: If you want ideas on customization, I'd recommend Blacklight: Retribution. It has some great ideas that you could definitely incorporate in to a third person shooter, and could work very well with all of the factions (especially Orks). And it's free to play, so it's not like you have to have any form of investment.

Having something simialr to BL:R's weapon and character customization in a 40k setting would allow players to very easily create their own unique character, and it'd be a potential revenue stream as well. You can unlock anything there using in-game money, however, using IRL money you can unlock things early. And since all weapons, armor, and components have drawbacks as well as benefits, it's fairly balanced, too, and not pay to win.

 Melissia wrote:
As an aside, to the devs: If you want ideas on customization, I'd recommend Blacklight: Retribution. It has some great ideas that you could definitely incorporate in to a third person shooter, and could work very well with all of the factions (especially Orks). And it's free to play, so it's not like you have to have any form of investment.

I would be severely opposed to that... hated their free to play model... But I guess to each their own. Don't see how this would work for a persistent world game anyway.

 Soladrin wrote:
Don't see how this would work for a persistent world game anyway.

How couldn't it work in a persistent world game?

There's not really anything stopping it from working in a persistent world.

Because freeby players will be so happy when they have to grind to get items that dissapear in a couple hours/days.

Unless I'm unaware of giant shift in their free to play model (it's been like a year since I last tried it) I don't see how anyone can enjoy those timed unlocks.

I say they make a cash shop where they could sell skins for weapons, armor sets.

So someone could buy a Black Templar skin if they so chose.

Skins for Craftworlds, Ork Clans, and Chaos Marines too.

Edit for typos

 Soladrin wrote:
Because freeby players will be so happy when they have to grind to get items that dissapear in a couple hours/days.

I've played the game since shortly after release, and I can say with confidence that you have always been able to purchase things permanently with in-game money in BL:R. It costs more money (chest armor might cost 300 gp for a three day rental, and 5000 permanent, with you earning 100 gp or so each round depending on your performance), but it also means you never have to save up for it again. Meanwhile the "try for 1/3/7/30 days" option (the shortest option is one day IIRC, though it might actually be three days) is there for those that just want to try the weapon out before they take the plunge and buy it permanently, or for those that are just too weak willed to save up.

And keep in mind, in the game, none of the weapons are specifically designed to be better than the other weapons, aside from suiting the player's style more.

I imagine they could get around this by allowing higher-ranked members of guilds better weapons if they really wanted to go that route, mind you.

Well, a quick look around the F2P market would show you that all succesfull models use the same method.

Real money is spent on convience items (exp boosts, early acces etc.) and cosmetic stuff. Diverging from this quickly get's you in play to win territory and these days most players quickly rebel after discovering that.

 Soladrin wrote:
Well, a quick look around the F2P market would show you that all succesfull models use the same method.

Real money is spent on convience items (exp boosts, early acces etc.) and cosmetic stuff.

Yep. And it works just fine, and is profitable for the company and enjoyable to most of the players.

 Melissia wrote:

 Soladrin wrote:
Well, a quick look around the F2P market would show you that all succesfull models use the same method.

Real money is spent on convience items (exp boosts, early acces etc.) and cosmetic stuff.

Yep. And it works just fine, and is profitable for the company and enjoyable to most of the players.

Yep, just look at the big guys on the market, Dota 2, LoL, World of Tanks (to some degree, some exclusive tanks are bit iffy), Mechwarrior Online etc. etc. They all handle it well.

Now look, I don't have ginormous problem with the suggested model for this game, the idea is very cool and if it works it would be fantastic. The sad thing is, I don't trust the internet enough to actually think for a second that it would work.

So, on the one hand I'd say go for it and get us those giant mobs of PC ork boyz to slaughter (or in my case, command). But for the love of god have a back up plan. But I guess the model would be so divergent from the norm you would have to restructure the entire game to change it. :X

Actually, to outline what I mean, here's one way it could be implemented:


Every Space Marine starts out with a standard set of Mk7 Aquila armor, and a Godwyn Pattern Boltgun and Bolt Pistol, a Chainsword, and frag grenades.

All of these are perfectly fine, balanced pieces of equipment-- good rate of fire, good accuracy, good recoil reduction and movement speed on the armor, etc.

From there, they can choose to spend in-game money on... side-grades to their boltgun. So let's say someone wants to play as a devastator marine. They save up money, and buy themselves a Heavy Bolter receiver permanently. It costs them a lot, but they're able to get it within a week of on and off playing, because it's a pretty basic weapon after all. Now they have a bog standard Godwyn pattern Heavy Bolter. But let's say they start to find that its recoil is too strong for them and they're not very good at controlling it. So they decide to try out a three day purchase a Emeritus pattern Stabilized Barrel (call it a temporary requisition), which sacrifices run speed and damage for a reduction in recoil and spread. A person who can control the recoil of the standard barrel is capable of doing more damage and is less vulnerable because they can move faster. Say they like it, and so they spend IRL money to unlock it permanently-- they could have saved up for it, but they didn't want to go without it and it only cost a few bucks, so they found it an acceptable cost.

And so on and so forth, with variations on each particular race allowing for customization. It's a good system and I think it's at least worth trying out.

Yeah, but this has the clear problem of not being able to obtain that thing permanently without spending cash and that's what rubs me wrong.

 Soladrin wrote:
Yeah, but this has the clear problem of not being able to obtain that thing permanently without spending cash

Were you not actually reading what I said? I rather clearly made the distinction between buying something permanently with in-game money vs. buying it permanently with IRL money.

BL:R also allows you to get things permanently for in-game money, and it always has allowed such, and that's waht this is based off of.

Ah misread that last part, my bad. Don't have to get so uppity about it straight away.

And back when I played it (like said, at least a year ago, which was pretty much at day 1) I know I bought something with real money and even that was timed. I immediately tossed the game after I discovered that.

Guys, stop talking about us on the 3rd person. :-) We are HERE reading your comments. The team and I will answer all your questions in the upcoming weeks. Regarding Sisters of Battle, they are one of the favorite from your dev team but we had to choose 4 to start and our plan is to add many more but we need to finish the game first. What I said about them was for Mass Market interview and NOT for the hardcore fan. They are very playable but we feel like the Necron that the Sisters deserve time from us to built them well and we wont have time before launch. We are a no BS studio and I allow ALL the dev team to talk to you with NO firewall between us. So if you want a cool game please tell us what you like and what you dont on the info we gave you. Remember that I am an EXEC. Yes I know the IP well and I am a hardcore player but I will not be the one making your game. The dev team will and all the next interviews will be done by them so expect more meat. I am the container but your dev team is the content.

This said, this openness will have his negative. I will make mistake in communication sometimes (already did many during E3 that my dev have corrected) so hopefully you prefer openness with corrections vs marketing and communication perfection.

I have decided on this very transparent approach, not to ''control'' the marketing messages to you but instead bring you onboard the dev of your Game.

BTW, I dont hate F2P... I hate Pay to Win.

Hope you like it!

Victory needs no explanation; Defeat allows none

Miguel
Your Behaviour Online studio head


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Solardin and Melissa, thanks for your post. Yes we have Twitter and Facebook accounts:

Website: http://bhvr.com/eternalcrusade/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/40kcrusade
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/40kcrusade

and feel free to connect on all the dev personal accounts as well since I told you that I did not put any firewall between you and your game dev..... As an Exec, I am still scared to death about my decision but after 2 try made by other studio on the 40K licence I still think that THIS game has to be YOURS to work.

Melissa, I really love Trolls since they have to have a real interest in our game to be negative. I never though you were one! :-)

With Time, they will understand that we are listening. If not.... I'll see them on the battlefield.

Victory needs no explanation; Defeat allows none

Miguel, my favorite faction is orks. If i pay for the game, do i still have to serve time on the punching bag faction and level through ork boy until i'm past officer while everyone else who paid and played space marines gets to be five times as powerful as me? Or do paying ork players skip the boy stage and go straight into nob/mekboy/specializations?

miguelcaron wrote:
Melissa, I really love Trolls since they have to have a real interest in our game to be negative. I never though you were one! :-)

Um, what? Trolls aren't always sincere about their negativity because the whole point of a troll is to cause inflammatory reactions that doesn't mean they're well informed or even honest about their remarks, that being said are you saying Mel is a troll? As I'm pretty sure she's giving her true

feelings and isn't trying to inflame.

 Cheesecat wrote:

miguelcaron wrote:
Melissa, I really love Trolls since they have to have a real interest in our game to be negative. I never though you were one! :-)

that being said are you saying Mel is a troll?

He said that he never thought she was one.

 Troike wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

miguelcaron wrote:
Melissa, I really love Trolls since they have to have a real interest in our game to be negative. I never though you were one! :-)

that being said are you saying Mel is a troll?

He said that he never thought she was one.

I can't tell if he's being sarcastic, although it's unlikely cause what company is sarcastic with potential customers?

Not at all Melissa's feedback is very to the point and we love it. Fans on 40K are humbling to us. Here is what a Fan Heretic Saint sent us regarding Sisters..... I think he married one!! This type of feedback is SOOO usefull for us. It makes us make a better game..... and for cheaper! :-)
__________________________________

Since you've given me the chance, I've compiled a "short" list of GW sources that should provide further inspiration on the Sisters of Battle, starting with a few links, then followed by titles of GW books that (I think) you should be able to request for free review from your partners at Games Workshop, as I heard they offer this service to the freelance writers of their Black Library novel division:

Web Links (archived homepages once maintained by Games Workshop, no longer available under their original address)
http://web.archive.org/web/20021004212519/http://www.armageddon3.com/English/Campaign/Troops/shroud.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20021004205717/http://www.armageddon3.com/English/Campaign/Troops/lady.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20021005050337/http://www.armageddon3.com/English/Campaign/Troops/ftearers.html
--- material on the Sororitas' participation on Armageddon from GW's campaign website, including letters from and about one of their leaders
http://web.archive.org/web/20071026021921/http://es.games-workshop.com/especialista/inquisitor/bestiario/sororitas.html
http://web.archive.org/web/20071218114030/es.games-workshop.com/especialista/inquisitor/bestiario/repentia.html
--- information on Battle Sisters and Repentia from GW's Inquisitor RPG, including a very cool short story of one Sister Anastasia
http://web.archive.org/web/20080411104905/uk.games-workshop.com/witchhunters/villainy-infamy/2/
--- some background on fugitive Battle Sister Ephrael Stern, also sheds some more light on where the Sororitas come from

Codex Material (primary sources)
2nd edition Codex Imperialis (contains one of the very few mentions of the Sisters of Battle maintaining their own starships)
2nd edition Codex: Sisters of Battle (also contains extensive background on their organisation, including numbers for the six Major Orders)
3rd edition Codex: Witch Hunters (adds alliance to the Inquisition and confirms that their wargear is equal to that of the Space Marines)
5th edition Codex: Sisters of Battle (as part of White Dwarf #380/381)

Rulebook References (usually just small mentions, but may be nice to know)
1st edition Rulebook, page 268: first mention of the Adepta Sororitas ever, talks a bit about purity control sweeps
3rd edition Rulebook, page 112: very cool/creepy short story about the Sisters' fanatism in regards to flagellantism and self-mortification
5th edition Rulebook, page 120: small mention of the Sisters of Battle and their role for the Imperium
6th edition Rulebook, page 195: very basic but good overview of the Sisters of Battle as an army/faction

Magazine Issues (note: all issue numbers are UK)
White Dwarf #211 - rules to field individual Sister squads as an add-on to Marine and Guard armies, as well as a Codex preview
White Dward #212 - special feature accompanying the release of the 2E Codex, some additional info on the Church Militant
White Dwarf #281 - info bits on the Sororitas Orders active in the 13th Black Crusade on page 47
White Dwarf #292 - Designer's Notes on Codex: Witch Hunters, contains some very interesting developer insight into the faction
White Dwarf #293 - multi-page article "Liber Sororitas", very deep and rare insights into the Adepta Sororitas, very recommended!
White Dwarf #380 - Sisters of Battle 5th edition Codex, part 1
White Dwarf #381 - Sisters of Battle 5th edition Codex, part 2
White Dwarf #382 - Ecclesiarchy missions, accompanied by some nice background on the faction's goals and motivations
White Dwarf #383 - Battle Sister painting guide; page 101 introduced new background on unique characteristics of the different Orders
White Dwarf #384 - two SoB Apocalypse formations: the Repentant Host and Purge Squadrons, on pages 62 and 63
Citadel Journal #49 - article and rules from Andy Hoare about a special Sororitas task force assigned to purge rogue Space Marines Chapters

Whew, that's about it! If you get around starting work on the Sisters of Battle as a playable faction, I hope the above is of some small help. As I said, the 40k background has become very extensive over the years, and details can easily get lost and sink into obscurity, so thanks for giving me the chance of dragging some of it back up for you.



Automatically Appended Next Post:
BTW, I dont remember if I told you but THANKS Heretic Saint for all your info and feedback!

Whilst we draw breath, we stand. Whilst we stand, we fight. Whilst we fight, we prevail


Automatically Appended Next Post:
I dont do sarcastic. I am french, but only french canadian!! LOL

David your Creative Director.... He is real French!! ;-) and both your leads Gameplay and Level are Americain!

Oh god.. the French.. we are all DOOOOMED.

Kidding aside. I do love this transparent approach and it requires some balls to do this in the current industry you work in.

I think if there is one thing we all want more info on, it would be the F2P model you have made some (rather vague) statements on.

Also, even though they aren't a stand alone faction in the tabletop, will you be looking at the Adeptus Mechanicum as playable in future updates?

miguelcaron wrote:This said, this openness will have his negative. I will make mistake in communication sometimes (already did many during E3 that my dev have corrected) so hopefully you prefer openness with corrections vs marketing and communication perfection.

I for one certainly do! It saddens me how many studios have "lost touch" with their playerbase by not talking to them directly, and from experience the marketing angle is often fairly nondescript. I much prefer to hear enthusiastic devs talk about their own ideas, and I'm sure I am not the only one who likes to see that their suggestions or feedback are at least heard.

Do you have any plans on how character progression will work so far? For example, how players will be able to attain new classes - will they pick one from the start, or will it branch out? Assuming of course that there are specific classes.
Melissia mentioned an interesting idea concerning "sidegrades" (a la Planetside 2), and though I personally don't think that a heavy bolter should be a sidegrade to a boltgun (with its damage output and rate of fire it just feels like something for a special class or a general upgrade), there could instead be slightly different boltgun patterns, not to mention various upgrades such as targeters, drum magazines, or limited special ammunition. I have a feeling players would love having a degree of customization available not only for their character, but also their wargear.

Also, how will you handle the different Chapters, Warbands, etc? On one hand, it might look odd if there are so many players all in different livery and colors, yet on the other there are many fans who look forward to play a very specific sub-faction, so to say. For example, I would expect that the Imperial Guard, when/if it eventually becomes playable, will be Cadians due to their prominence .. yet I find the Valhallans to be more interesting. This problem would surely exist across all factions.
Or are you looking to solve this via the cash shop, in that the predefined appearance would likely be more numerous due to not everyone buying additional customization, yet purchaseable "costume packs" basically representing reinforcements, or something like that? Or would you try to offer a smaller selection of sub-factions to keep things more uniform?

miguelcaron wrote:BTW, I dont remember if I told you but THANKS Heretic Saint for all your info and feedback!

You certainly did! I hope it'll be useful once the time comes. I have a feeling not even your contacts at GW remember some of those little gems anymore - unless they have a reaaaally good index.

Ave Imperator!

 Soladrin wrote:
And back when I played it (like said, at least a year ago, which was pretty much at day 1) I know I bought something with real money and even that was timed. I immediately tossed the game after I discovered that.

No offense, but that was your fault, considering that permanent purchases were available from pretty much day one.

miguelcaron wrote:
What I said about them was for Mass Market interview and NOT for the hardcore fan.

It might seem harsh ,but I actually consider it WORSE that you are misleading the mass public about it than just talking trash among the fans.

That said, I know your reasonings behind the choice of marines, orks, and eldar as the three factions (no, I don't consider CSMs a separate faciton, they're just space marines with spikes and an "I hate my dad" complex), but that doesn't make me a single iota less dissatisfied with it. Especially given that apparently my comments weren't taken seriously by a certain dev-- I don't care about "bringing the sexy", and if your company thinks that this is the only reason that anyone would ever play a female character, that says a lot of sad things about the company (and the gaming industry in general).

I have no desire to roleplay as a guy for hundreds of hours of my life, never mind a generic screaming old bald guy like some variety of Space Marine. I'm at the point in my life where I have to be picky on what games I can invest money in (I'll be perpetually low on funds for the foreseeable future), and if the game wants to convince me to invest money in it, it needs to accommodate my desire to play a female character, preferably one NOT pigeonholed in to some random niche while male characters get to play EVERY kind of character.

People have called this petty in the past, but meh, I'm not rich enough to be able to buy every single out there, so I'm picky with what I buy.

And to avoid dragging the thread off topic, I'm gonna PM some additional stuff.

 Lynata wrote:

Also, how will you handle the different Chapters, Warbands, etc? On one hand, it might look odd if there are so many players all in different livery and colors, yet on the other there are many fans who look forward to play a very specific sub-faction, so to say. For example, I would expect that the Imperial Guard, when/if it eventually becomes playable, will be Cadians due to their prominence .. yet I find the Valhallans to be more interesting. This problem would surely exist across all factions.
Or are you looking to solve this via the cash shop, in that the predefined appearance would likely be more numerous due to not everyone buying additional customization, yet purchaseable "costume packs" basically representing reinforcements, or something like that? Or would you try to offer a smaller selection of sub-factions to keep things more uniform?

I would like to know this as well. Maybe different "guilds" will have their "warbands" colors.

Migeul Caron, like it or not, I'm your new best friend on the internet.

Welcome to the greatest community of loyalists this side of m.41.

There was once a website called Warp Watchers, an entire site dedicated to DMO that went by the wayside with the game. We were as sad to see it go as we were to see Vigil Studios disintegrate. It must be therefore said that we wish you the best of luck and trust in you but perhaps timidly after our last breakup.

To break the Ice and unleash this pent up dam we all know exists, I'm just going to lay out everything I worked on when I was on Warp Watchers. Take what you will from it, I'm doing this from memory unfortunately, there were pages of suggestions and hopes there that will likely never see the light of day.

Speaking from the veterans of Warp Watchers:

GAME MECHANICS, CLASSES, AND BALANCE

First the simple stuff:

Third person is great for this type of game, especially if melee is a component (which it should be!!). Switching to first person is really useful for sniping. Customization of HUD's, key bindings, and controls is a must. Destructible scenery would be great, as well as also being able to manipulate it - digging trenches as the IG, fortifying/orkifying buildings, taint, Tyraniforming, ect.

We, DEMAND use of vehicles, especially tanks!! *raises fist... remembers place... slowly drops fist and clears throat awkwardly.*

We want all the races represented. We want to play as them all (eventually) if at all possible. We want the SISTERS OF BATTLE, SM's, Inquisition, Deathwatch, ADEPTUS FREAKIN' MECHANICUS, IG (please don't just do Cadian's, we want to see Krieg, Elysia, Vostroya, and even your own, or even our own creations - see customization, pg 19), Orks, Eldar, Dark Eldar, CSM, Traitor Guard, Dark Mechanicus, Demons of all the Gods, the Tau, Necrons, and Tyranids.

Each race should have an omniscient AI that commands NPC's to battle against each other even when players are offline. The game shouldn't even need players to function. Each AI draws battle lines and pushes them in a great game of chess, players can either exploit, dive within, or drive into chaos if they so choose.

Within each playable race we want classes and specializations that make sense and help balance the game. A Sister of Battle can become more than the equal of a SM when granted the reward of her Faith, and the value and lore of a SM must be honored. One on his own should be fully capable of doing the damage of Relic's Captain Titus could do on the battlefield, and only utilized in as dire situations. Relic's assault marine's are incredibly fun, and the rock paper scissors dynamic between Tactical, Devastator, and Assault Marines is well balanced. A class system balanced like this would be acceptable, but we would prefer even more specialization in a next gen game.

FACTIONS, PVP and PVE

FFA is the best option. Thank you so much for not doing a two faction system.

PvP should be mixed into PvE, as well as being mixed into instance and open world. Above all, it should never feel like a grind. A mix between Exterminatus mode and an instanced story-mode campaign would make for fantastic Dungeon crawling. As would mini Dota style arenas instanced on the front lines where players gain additional temporary skills the longer they participate. (I will elaborate further in another post). Cringe if you will by copying the spirit of a game like SMITE, Dota, or LoL, but I like to think of it more like WoW's old school Alterac Valley, a battle that did not end until a commander was killed, and I was a proud patron of playing 8 hour long matches of brutal attrition. As I understand it, the Tyranids are the main divers of the PvE experience, which I applaud, it's a sound choice. However, to mesh the experience of PvE and PvP into a seamless environment, definitely consider the positives of what WAR online attempted. RvR was a great idea. It would have been a lot better in a fully open environment like Planetside. NPC's shouldn't be mindless automatons wondering around for no reason other than to guard our "Quest Location 172" to complete "Quest 172: Collect 12 Tyranid Gonads".

We should never again see a WoW style instance of "pull, fight, rinse, repeat." Please don't be tempted to go that route. Even I will not buy it.

Instead, experiment with "reaction based instances", where NPC's are alerted of an intrusion based upon how braisen players are in their assault. For example, players (more than likely Orks, SM's, SoB, Well equipped IG, and CSM) who simply blow down the front doors and slog their way through an instance, should come to expect the instance to react by throwing everything it possibly can back at them all at once. Without the proper preparations and battlefield tactics, they would be overwhelmed. On the other hand, players can find more tactical ways of exploring an instance. Blowing open a sewer channel, gav-chuting or teleporting into a key location, or finding an alternative way in may be more fruitful than simply marching up to the Black Gates and demanding justice.

This applies to player held "Capitals" and even the Tyranid hive mind in the open world. Attack even a single organism, and the whole Hive Mind is alerted to an attack on it's sovereignty, pushing further into their territory and killing more should get a larger response. Fail to hold the line as the response gets more difficult to handle, and the Tyranids wont just stop at their borders, but will launch an all out counterattack (against everything!) until they are contained once again. The same is true with every other race, but will largely depend on players themselves, not supporting NPC's.

Seems logical, smash a hornet's nest, get stung.

Keep this in mind as we discuss RVR next.

CUSTOMIZATION, CRAFTING, and RVR

Customization*: As mentioned above, it's become an iconic expectation that Warhammer 40k needs massive capabilities for customization. A simple army painter isn't just what we want anymore. We want about as much freedom as you can possibly give us. I am totally ecstatic that you have given us this in to help be part of this game and I believe that we can help you continually improve the game with a world editor of sorts for each faction. More specifically, give us different levels of freedom in "building" our factions with different levels of independence.

1. Give us complete control over the look of our character's armor in the form of crafting to design our own masterpieces. For example: we get an upgrade to our armor and we decide that we may not be satisfied with the new look, or not be comfortable with forfeiting the look of our old armor. Using a streamlined system (with boundaries limited to the look of the class and race), we could manipulate a basic Space Marine shoulder pad into a howling skull, perhaps with blood dripping from it's mouth, or a simple tattered loincloth into a chained belt with trophies dangling down instead. Perhaps, if I had gained a skull trophy from combat, I could even attach it. This editor (STC templates) could be the driver of the in game economy, with higher level players getting greater ranges of customization, equipment and weapons the more they play.

2. Give us a wide degree of control over Guild construction (guild housing, guild outposts/bases, ect.). Relax. Customization of the looks here isn't as important as character development, but allowing us to actually design a base with resources and watch it being built before our eyes would be enormously satisfying and a greater incentive to defend it with our friends that put in effort to help raise it.

3. Give us ways to help the strategy of our Faction's AI. Give rewards to players who go out of their way to dig trenches or erect fortifications for NPC's to guard. To the Eldar, who may not utilize a static strategy, give rewards to players who help erect Warpgates and help keep the Eldar mobile.

4. Allow us to influence the world in ways other games have yet to do. Destructible scenery is just as important as being able to construct or influence it. In a four faction system, SEEING each race become visibly tougher as the long war rages on, and evolve into a game that has each race rise and fall as an Empire would be a rare treat. Crafting can definitely extend to large world projects, supported by the faction AI itself. For example, the Imperium AI wants an orbital cannon built. It donates a set amount of resources based on those who have skills in crafting and says "spend them here, and be rewarded." Instantly, the world has a great event that spurs RvR, PvP, crafting, and the economy. An ever changing environment will provide for a fan-base that will be die hard converts that will be loyal to the game for as long or longer than World of Warcraft (who themselves changed the environment for the players).

I'm sure that's an overload, but I hope my enthusiasm carries at least a bit of weight. I know my friends from Warp Watchers would both be proud and be yelling that I didn't cover enough ground.

Thank you for taking the time to read this, and thank you again for taking our idea's seriously. I will be happy to post more when time allows.

Notes for the future:

*Resources
*All crafting economy
*PvP Instance buff
*Racial stat/perks
*Naming Weapons

Let me just make it clear that I am very impressed by Miguel Caron's decision to come onto Dakka to post. The 40k IP is a tough one to work with, with a very demanding fanbase that will probably form the core of the playerbase. A lot of game-dev companies don't talk to their fans anymore, the only two I can think of off the top of my head who still do are CCP (Eve Online) and Relic Entertainment (DoW, CoH, etc.)

I do believe that by taking in our feedback and discussions, they essentially have a free market focus group to work with and help develop the game to make sure that they hit the right spots. Also, very different approach from GW, so thumbs up!

I likewise appreciate the chance to talk to the devs.

This is pretty cool! I'd also like to express support for Mel's ideas. She keeps stealing all the good ones.

Well to be fair, my ideas regarding weapons were pulled heavily from Blacklight: Retribution, but I think it could work very well in this game as well. It's very fun to customize your weapon, and 40k has TONS of flavor regarding its various weapons.

This is very true.

For those criticizing the history of this dev studio (including myself), I found this little snippet from MMORPG.com which allayed some of my fears:

This one caught us all off guard when just a day before E3, we were setting up appointments with Behaviour Interactive for an unannounced MMORPG... little did we know that Behaviour’s Massive team had been built and put together by none other than Miguel Caron (who many MMO gamers might remember from time on Anarchy Online and Age of Conan at Funcom). In fact, many of the team on Eternal Crusade are directly from Funcom’s Montreal studio, and their plans are nothing short of incredible for the third-person action MMORPG with a heavy slant on PVP and sandbox warfare. You can read a great overview on the game right here, but stay-tuned in the coming weeks for more info as Eternal Crusade is only 18 months from Open Beta, and Behaviour has a ton of plans to keep us all informed leading up to that momentous occasion.

Emphasis added. Team is consisted of MMO veterans from Anarchy Online and Age of Conan. Makes sense, as Funcom laid off a lot of staff in January from their Montreal studio.

Yeah, I already heard that behaviour picked up a lot of talented people from all the recent layoffs. Good to know they got their hands on some veterans.

Screaming Exec and Devs:

Please brainstorm some more about your F2P model. I am not sure if confining the (initially) free loading players to the roll of cannon fodder as lowly orkboyz will entice them to stick around for the actual game after they've paid for it. Allow them to see more of the game, especially as it changes quite dramatically with the player based order system. As a free player without any chance to advance there's really no incentive to follow orders at all (and that makes it also quite pointless to play as a paying ork "officer").

Two less important wishes:
Please include friendly fire and please no endless click one button melee combat (try Drakan 1 on the PC to see how it should be done).

If you manage to make IG a playable faction, can you add the option to have a female IG character?

I would also like to see the current business model replaced with something a little more balanced.

What exactly will the game play be like? Will it use a power bar, a la WoW, or will it be a straight TPS, like in Space Marine?

 Melissia wrote:
Well to be fair, my ideas regarding weapons were pulled heavily from Blacklight: Retribution, but I think it could work very well in this game as well. It's very fun to customize your weapon, and 40k has TONS of flavor regarding its various weapons.

To be fair BL:R's customisation is stalled flat because many players build the same guns - high damage. And to be frank, 40k's customisation only really extends to scopes, minor tweaks and ammo packs. So really gun parts I don't think would work so well. But we should get the full-blown arsenal because there will be days when an Ork must break out a Burna and go roastin'. So I would recommend we have a large amount of weapons to choose from.

Aside from that I wish Miguel and Co the best of luck for this project and hope something good comes out

I agree, weapon variety is far more important than customization. There are so many different weapons already represented on the tabletop and in the fluff that there's no shortage to draw from, and having more weapons available means more roles that can be filled on the battlefield.

Perhaps then a compromise could be met between a high volume of weapons that come standard with 40k, and then huge degrees of variance for each weapon. They would retain the same stats and fulfill a specific role on the battlefield, but could look incredibly different from each other.

For example: All Lasguns would have the same stats as each other, but no two would be the same in visual appearance.

I think you could keep true to the fluff and still have high levels of parts customization. I'm in the process of building my own AR-15 rifle from parts IRL for example. The number of parts to chose from for my build is staggering beyond belief ranging from the very cosmetic (matching furniture and a specific muzzle brake), to the extremely functional (ambidextrous safeties, extended bolt releases, etc) to the base features of the weapon itself from type and quality of bolt, features of the upper receiver. The length, steel type, and twist ratio of the barrel (along with a dozen other small features). I mean I'm not saying we need that kind of detail in modifying the in game weapons I'm just thinking Mel's idea has merit while keeping true to your play style, I'm thinking the armor and weapons mods of Mass Effect now, little variances in look, style, and benefits that come together to make you unique. Throw that in with purely cosmetic modifications and upgrades (for an extra X in game currency get the Gilded Edition pauldrons that have angry cyber eagles nesting on them!) THEN release 40k players on it. The most fluff obsessed fan base in the known nerdly universe with that level of customization? Sure some WAAC players will make it less fun for everyone whether you're new to the Grimdark or not, but that's every MMO.

Further expansion of the above, you're an Ork and you're in a "Watch the world burn kinda mood" you can grab your burna and some cheap cigars from your locker and go for it stock, or you can swap out nozzles that increase dispersion of your flame shot, or up your range but narrow your stream of burning promethium vengeance. The former gives you better area damage, the latter boosts damage to individual targets. Or pull a Chesty Puller and mount a bayonet on it so you're really ready for CQC

 DemetriDominov wrote:
Perhaps then a compromise could be met between a high volume of weapons that come standard with 40k, and then huge degrees of variance for each weapon. They would retain the same stats and fulfill a specific role on the battlefield, but could look incredibly different from each other.

For example: All Lasguns would have the same stats as each other, but no two would be the same in visual appearance.

Yes, this. Similar to what the DoW games did. E.g. once Necrons are introduced (which I take as a given when we're discussing including Sisters!), your Overlord could be able to individualize its staff, cloak or head design. Those designs do not grant any in-game bonuses of course.

miguel, would it be possible to answer some questions on the Clan/Chapter/Guild features of the game?

Thanks

www.battle-brothers.net

Hey guys, Im behind this game 100% and I look forward to your updates. My only request is to offer multiple chapters. The only chapter on an actual "Eternal Crusade" are the Black Templars, and in order to keep the title accurate you might alienate some marine players.

 Juvieus Kaine wrote:

 Melissia wrote:
Well to be fair, my ideas regarding weapons were pulled heavily from Blacklight: Retribution, but I think it could work very well in this game as well. It's very fun to customize your weapon, and 40k has TONS of flavor regarding its various weapons.

To be fair BL:R's customisation is stalled flat because many players build the same guns - high damage. And to be frank, 40k's customisation only really extends to scopes, minor tweaks and ammo packs. So really gun parts I don't think would work so well. But we should get the full-blown arsenal because there will be days when an Ork must break out a Burna and go roastin'. So I would recommend we have a large amount of weapons to choose from.

Aside from that I wish Miguel and Co the best of luck for this project and hope something good comes out

Not enitrely. For example, I've seen several people with TSMGs like mine-- practically no recoil and spread, using rapid fire and toxic/incendiary rounds to deal large mounts of damage. They also nerfed the high-damage stuff, balancing it out by reducing range and increasing spread/recoil, so that instant-kill BARs (for example) actually have spread, unlike other BARs.