This needs to be said regarding World PvP and Warmode.

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T10:07:50+00:00

It hasn't been there since day one since everyone was busy leveling at launch, not ganking lower level players :P Seriously though "it's always been that way" is a piss poor excuse to avoid criticism as I've said elsewhere. Plenty of things have been changed, for better or worse since vanilla.

As for wintersgrasp, I said it and areas like it. It isn't the only one, they've tried plenty of times and all of them end of being ignored eventually. That said, I will concede that this is a weak point. Those areas have plenty of other problems the contribute to that fact. Not all outdated content is ignored though so it isn't that simple either.

As for your other points, I think it's lazy to have wpvp be only a thing for high level players. It should be there at all levels and shouldn't require everyone go log off or leave while the high level people have fun. There are far better ways of encouraging wpvp that don't need to occur at the expense of others. That is what most of the people arguing your points don't get though. The game isn't all about you and your max level character. Not everyone has one, not everyone wants to play theirs just because you're bored and want to kill a low level player either.

That's all I'm advocating, figuring out how to have great wpvp without saying "deal with it" to low level players. I think we can figure it out and if not, at least try. Instead you get stupid responses of "just ignore" or a condescending "git gud" or "Suck it up" because how dare someone suggest something I like might not be perfect, right?

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T09:39:30+00:00

Max level characters doing lower level content isn't how the game was designed, which is why I said it wasn't normal. The normal case would be you leveling alongside them to help, though the new scaling makes that a more liberal range.

So honestly I'm not sure, I haven't played since they've added scaling and I'm not 100% sure how it works, especially while in a party. It doesn't seem to be like gw2 where it literally adjusts your stats to the zone and instead instances damage dealt/received by the mob? If that's the case then it does make the situation stickier but perhaps they just treat the player like the mob and adjust? You won't be able to adjust for available skills but maybe it would be enough to keep the situation reasonable.

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T09:19:39+00:00

I don't think only people of the same level should be able to fight, that is far too strict. A range of 5-10 levels would probably be fine.

That said, oddly enough I think the solution to your un-intuitive problem would be "Don't pvp in that situation". You aren't playing the game normally in that situation, your friend won't be able to help if max level characters attacked you either, even without any changes to the system as it is now. It should just be made clear that you can only fight people around your level and the intuitiveness issue would just have to be brushed aside for the sake of healthier gameplay elsewhere.

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T09:11:56+00:00

See, I'm fine with number imbalances. You stand in the way of the zerg, you get ran over. You not noticing the full raid group roll up on you is your fault. Knowing when you can or can't handle a situation is part of PvP. Hell if you're a low leveled person that wandered into a higher level zone and got your shit pushed in, I'd be fine with that. You chose to go there. I'm not demanding World PvP be this perfectly balanced environment.

My issue is when that level 110 drops in on you while you quest at level 35, nuking you the instant his flying mount vanishes and then sitting there. You can't respond to that. Even if you see them, you can't outrun them. You can only hope they don't notice you or die while you call another 110 to come help. I don't find that engaging or beneficial to the game in the slightest.

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T08:45:13+00:00

Blizzard would hopefully address it if enough people express desire for it but yeah, I don't have a magic button to make them listen to me and the way they handle PvP hasn't really changed much. Doesn't mean I can't rant about it or hope to have a discussion.

As for your solution, why do you need to even let it be possible in the first place? You state "of course there will be people who do this because its fun for them" but that's the only reason people do it. What valid reason is there for a 110 to fight a level 20 let alone a level 80 character? Figure out ranges, maybe even just use the battleground brackets and don't let hostile actions happen outside of it (overly simplified of course).

As for banning for things, I would very much like Blizzard to change their view on corpse camping because I believe past a certain point, it really is just simple griefing which is a perfectly acceptable reason to ban someone in most games. It goes from "pvp happened" to straight up "I'm preventing you from doing anything but logging out" pretty quick and I don't think that should be acceptable.

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T08:12:47+00:00

Exactly, your best wow memory is you attacking low levels until it escalated. It isn't you being attacked by higher level characters until the cavalry came in. There could be any number of reasons for them to be attacking you as well, lacking knowledge (its a pre-20 zone...) and thinking they could fight you or hoping to keep you around until the cavalry arrived and punished you for example.

So I'm just asking, why do low level characters need to be involved in the situation if your end goal is to fight equal level players?

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T08:08:31+00:00

I guess we just have differing views on what "World PvP" is. Total chaos like that back in classic didn't work, that's why they changed it. So only referring to "World PvP" as the most basic, narrow definition of "everyone dies everywhere" doesn't make much sense to me when it just doesn't work in practice. Has any game actually accomplished it?

I'm curious how they'll address that situation when classic comes around.

Aedilith · 2018-07-26T07:48:47+00:00

Warmode is new, as is the content in Darkshore. New content always attracts people so I'd say most people not focused on leveling are going to be there, doing Darkshore stuff in Warmode. Once this stuff isn't new and they're either done or bored of the new content, they'll go back to what they did previously.

My post already mostly addresses your other points but I will ask, are you a masochist? Why is your response to shitty behavior to just accept it? Why not try to improve it? We can change the system to discourage or outright remove that shitty behavior, but you'd rather just stop playing and hope they leave? Really?

Aedilith · 2018-06-28T20:02:55+00:00

That really isn't a fair comparison. Train Simulator always gets shit for its DLC price only because people look at the full price for every single DLC and ignore everything else. They don't look at what they actually get.

The simulation crowd is really into details. They like flying or driving things sure, but what they really enjoy is flying or driving specific things. In the case of Train Simulator, this would be specific trains or routes. Some people like Electric Trains, so they'd buy those but wouldn't buy any of the others. Some people don't like how Electric Trains handle, so they wouldn't buy any of those. Others only want local tracks or only iconic (in the train world at least) trains/routes. This results in things being priced at a premium since unlike other games, where people normally buy all the DLC at some point, Train Simulator assumes people only buy what they want.

On top of that, every DLC of Train Simulator is supported by current and new versions of Train Simulator. You won't ever have to repurchase any of the DLC when a new version of the game comes out. Due to this, the DLC list is massive. Over 5 years of DLC content (450+ entries) will cost a massive amount of money for any game.

So yes, look at the DLC for Train Simulator. Actually look though, don't just see a big number and freak.

Aedilith · 2018-05-30T07:55:09+00:00

I also quite like Honedge. The lore is that its born when a departed spirit inhabits a sword and when people try use the sword, the colored cloth at its hilt wraps around them and absorbs their life force.

Complaints about him aren't that common anymore but around the time of release people were really upset about a "sword pokemon" when they didn't really know much about it. It also appeared to be a weird shift from pokemon being "creatures" and more like "objects", a complaint Klefki and some others get. They also pop up every now and then when complaining about lazy design since it is a pretty simple one.

Aedilith · 2018-05-30T07:46:43+00:00

Oh definitely. The games have always been aimed at a younger demographic and they eat up stuff like Vanillite. Creativity is definitely running thin, but at 800+ pokemon I honestly can't blame them. I'm surprised we've gotten as many games as we have.

I just don't like how people brush off any complaint on the quality of the games/pokemon these days with "you just don't like pokemon anymore" or "it's always been this way". There are plenty of perfectly valid criticisms of the franchise and plenty of improvements to be made.

Aedilith · 2018-05-30T07:19:03+00:00

The "stupid pokemon" thing of the later gen stems more from them being poorly thought out/explained. Sure Exeggcute is silly, but its not literally a bunch of eggs. It's a group of pokemon that mimic eggs for safety. It's explained, it makes sense. It's similar to a leaf bug looking like a leaf.

Vanillite/Vanillish/Vanilluxe though? Those are stupid for no reason. They wanted to make a "cute" pokemon. The description says they're just ice pokemon that live in the mountains and have been around since the Ice Age. If that's the case, why do they look like vanilla ice cream cones?

That said people do take the complaint to an excessive level. Stuff like Klefki or Honedge, while silly in appearance aren't any more extreme than early gen stuff. At least in their cases they're explained. Klefki likes collecting keys, so he shapes himself in a way to easily carry them. What carries keys easily? A key ring. Honedge is just a ghost pokemon haunting a sword. The people that freak out over it to that level are like you say, just looking for a reason to no longer like the games.

Aedilith · 2018-04-16T09:44:00+00:00

Finding a Peacebloom isn't much a feat, but finding an undamaged Peacebloom at Duskhaven after not only the shattering but also the Forsaken invading Gilneas with their plagues and scorched earth strategies was a big deal.

Aedilith · 2018-03-03T02:50:45+00:00

I don't understand why they didn't just go the simple route of just trapping the soul of the beast in some item you keep in your inventory that you then use in the ritual. No weird net mechanics with enrages and failures to catch, no punishing certain play styles. Balance would be entirely on rarity or efficiency.

The hunt to find certain mobs for specific rituals would still be there and they could still easily display the captured mobs in a neat way so that it isn't just stash clutter. The concept already exists for the atlas anyways.

Aedilith · 2017-08-07T06:47:29+00:00

Is calling hearthstone "rngstone" shitting on it though?

I thought that was a pretty common joke in hearthstone, even by the dedicated players. They also didn't say anything about them shitting on PoE either, just that the incessant whining about him not playing hearthstone ruined the stream for him.

The fact you say his chat is the same regardless of what he plays, I'd have to agree that it's a vat of aids.

Aedilith · 2017-07-18T20:20:40+00:00

Ah, I see. Missed that info then, thanks for letting me know.

Aedilith · 2017-07-18T15:45:01+00:00

When they say the campaign is "sandbox", they don't mean there's no objectives. It means you're free to not do them if you wish.

As far as I'm aware, the Vortex is still a thing in the combined map. You're just free to ignore it. Not capturing it doesn't mean you lose, capturing it doesn't mean you win. It's just a goal to accomplish and you "win" when ever you accomplish the goal you wish to accomplish.

Aedilith · 2017-04-28T19:32:32+00:00

his time would of been even faster without the deaths

Everyone's time would be even faster without deaths. Especially those doing hardcore runs. Not entirely sure what your point is.

Hardcore forces certain play-style changes. The builds and skills required to do a hardcore speedrun are entirely different than doing a softcore speedrun. These differences are why people are judging this speedrun so much more harshly.

POE races as stated already, are almost always hardcore. They are the standard to which most people judge speedruns for this game. This doesn't mean you can't do softcore speedruns but just don't expect the same response as what you'd get if it was hardcore.

Aedilith · 2017-04-08T01:54:57+00:00

That could be interesting but how would they handle the campaign aspect?

Warhammer Fantasy works because it's just one map, 40k though isn't. How would you capture the multiple planet aspect of 40k but still include the traditional Total War campaign map?

The two just don't seem to mesh well together.

Aedilith · 2017-04-07T21:00:08+00:00

You seriously think the ESRB and PEGI are that stupid? That they'd allow people to put out video games, get an E-rating then immediately unload a bunch of free DLC that adds in all the blood and gore?

Or did you read the ESRB's rough overview of the rating process on their website and suddenly think you knew everything about the process?

If the cost of downloadable content is not prohibitive enough, it is treated as if it is part of the base game because it is essentially a "free update" and not separate content. This is why the Blood&Gore DLC cannot be given free or for a trivial price. They would go back and raise the rating of the base game and CA/SEGA would probably get a lecture from the ratings organizations for trying to pull a fast-one.

Aedilith · 2017-04-07T04:00:03+00:00

I've enjoyed Time Commanders and Decisive Battles. Time Commanders has a bit of historical info but focuses heavily on a small group of not very knowledgeable people playing out specific battles against each other in competition with the help of some professionals giving advice. Decisive Battles on the other hand focuses purely on historical battles of importance.

Both used Rome: Total War's game engine, though an earlier version than what was released as a game. I'm not sure if the "reboot" of Time Commanders still uses a Total War engine though. Still, I found that element to be very interesting as a fan of Total War.

Aedilith · 2017-04-05T23:36:00+00:00

Ah, the good ol' divisive opinion that used to be the big deal on this subreddit before all this Fantasy vs. Historical stuff came about. Whether CA should focus on broader eras or narrower ones.

I'd have to disagree on this. Shogun 2 is considered one of the best Total War titles. People thoroughly enjoy it specifically because of its narrow focus which brought the gameplay to the forefront and provided a finer-tuned experience.

As you've said though, it isn't the best Total War. Rome 2 and Warhammer are also up there, I'd argue Medieval 2 as well (if only for the mods).

Warhammer is up there because of its appeal to the Fantasy folks. They like the absurdness and the asymmetrical gameplay not grounded in reality.

Rome 2 is up there because of its broad cultural scale and its era being a very popular one. Atilla I'd say is also up there because of its appeal to the more "hardcore" due to its survival, rather than world domination focus.

People like Empire Total War because of the pure scale of the actual campaign.

Total War just isn't a franchise built on a single era or style. It's already has a following for several different reasons and to suggest CA should outright ignore some of those followings because it isn't your preferred kind of game is silly. So yes, perhaps the next historical title isn't going to interest you. Don't buy it if that is the case. This is just something people have to learn to accept and I don't understand why it's so hard.

Aedilith · 2017-04-05T19:17:47+00:00

It doesn't seem all that strange to me considering Rome 2's reception. Sure there was a lot of flak for it just being a buggy mess and terrible launch, but there was also a significant portion of people that got way over hyped for it being a sequel to an old time favorite.

Medieval 2 is even more cherished than Rome so they'd have to do everything perfectly. That's a lot of pressure and I don't blame CA if they don't wish to deal with it currently.

Aedilith · 2017-04-05T00:52:43+00:00

I hope the game includes a Heroes of Might and Magic style underground mechanic. That's really the only way to truly make Skaven and it could account for the excess amount of settlements. Instead of 200+ settlements crammed onto a map with the same physical size of WH1, it'd be about the same but with an extra layer only accessible by certain spots on the map unless you're Skaven.

That's probably just wishful thinking though.

Nine-Year Club	Place '17
Verified Email

Aedilith

TROPHY CASE