Must read: Regarding siege warfare and PvP in AOC

[LordjOX]

A good article by IGN: IGN: Age of Conan's Siege Battles

However:

Since many guilds will likely be trying to schedule attacks on the limited number of battle keeps (there can be 8 active at a time), Funcom has implemented a priority structure. Whichever guild has members that fare better in the PvP minigames gets priority when determining who gets to lead a siege assault.

That's retarded. Basically means there is only PvP minigame content for the casual players. And if they aren't "leet" enough, sorry no siege warfare for you! This whole queue for siegeing a keep is silly, why not just make it attackable by anyone between certain times of the day?

Seems they've made alot of retarded design decisions

 

[rynnor]

I agree - I would let any guild attack at any time really - I cant see the game die'ing because keeps are changing hands too often but the reverse could really hurt it.

All the systems they have revealed so far seem to me to reward those guilds who are able to grab an un-contested keep at the start - anyone following them will have it far harder!

 

[fettoken]

Ah, attacking keeps is not "realtime" ? This is both good and bad imo.

 

[rynnor]

Ah, attacking keeps is not "realtime" ? This is both good and bad imo.

Theres a queue to attack them lol - "Ok barbarian horde - apparently another horde is higher up the queue so if you can just mill about for a few days..."

I hate queue's and see no reason for one in this situation - it all seems rather carebear to me.

 

[fettoken]

Theres a queue to attack them lol - "Ok barbarian horde - apparently another horde is higher up the queue so if you can just mill about for a few days..."

I hate queue's and see no reason for one in this situation - it all seems rather carebear to me.

Queue is crap yes, then there is no real reason for being 9 keeps in the frontiers!

On another note, it seems that the keeps are a bit "thin". Would be cool if you could upgrade them like in DaoC. Ahh, the "like in DaoC" wishes ^^

 

[Vasconcelos]

Beta forums are literally burning on this issue.

We were all expecting a pvp zone like Emain but FFA instead realm based....:touch:

 

[BloodOmen]

hmmm... tempting to cancel my pre-order now this just ruined it for me..... they're on about putting that in now whats to stop them from doing it with other shit later? bad choice on their part gonna cancel my pre-order... such a shame.

 

[Vasconcelos]

Well its still a matter of changing the rule: "fare better in minigames" to "fare better in overall PvP, both minigames and open PvP at the border kingdoms.... i have hope in FC, the dev community is super active in forums (god bless euro-games were europeans actually have a say in betas *cough*WAR*cough*) and prolly taking note of the reactions.

 

[Tilda]

Guys I think people are over reacting.

It still sounds like we have a pvp zone like Emain by FFA rather than realm based. Roaming RvR isn't hurt by this.

The keep rules have pros and cons.

Attacking at any time:
Pro - no queue to wait for
- can attach whenever you want whatever you want
Con - This could quite possibly take us back to daoc times with alarm clock raids. It strikes me that AoC will be great fun if people look past the timetable issue because it will prevent alarm clock raids etc.

From my pov, this isn't a queue to attack the keep, as anybody can still do this. Its a queue to claim the keep. ie - 5 guilds can attack a keep, but only the guild on the queue will claim it. This strikes me as quite sensible but perhaps not the best solution. What about allocating to guild who contributes the most to the siege?

I think you have to differentiate the "timer when you can attack" which is a good thing, preventing AC's, and the queue to claim, which might not be the best way of implementing a good idea.

If you allocated to the guild who contributed to the siege the most - the random tag-alongs wouldn't get it, the 2fg of some guild who just came to kill people wouldn't get it, it would be the people to built trebs and took the time to take the walls down, and then it would be the people who cleared out buildings on the inside that would get it, in all likely hood, the same guild that would (if the system were in place) have booked the claim weeks in advance.

 

[rynnor]

hmmm... tempting to cancel my pre-order now this just ruined it for me..... they're on about putting that in now whats to stop them from doing it with other shit later? bad choice on their part gonna cancel my pre-order... such a shame.

I wouldnt cancel over this yet - none of it is settled so see what happens I guess?

 

[LordjOX]

Guys I think people are over reacting.

It still sounds like we have a pvp zone like Emain by FFA rather than realm based. Roaming RvR isn't hurt by this.

There is no RvR. AOC doesn't have factions based upon race choice (there is no Realm). So it will be Group vs Group or Guild vs Guild in the Border Kingdoms. Otherwise it'll be FFA.

The keep rules have pros and cons.

Attacking at any time:
Pro - no queue to wait for
- can attach whenever you want whatever you want
Con - This could quite possibly take us back to daoc times with alarm clock raids. It strikes me that AoC will be great fun if people look past the timetable issue because it will prevent alarm clock raids etc.

From my pov, this isn't a queue to attack the keep, as anybody can still do this. Its a queue to claim the keep. ie - 5 guilds can attack a keep, but only the guild on the queue will claim it. This strikes me as quite sensible but perhaps not the best solution. What about allocating to guild who contributes the most to the siege?

I think you have to differentiate the "timer when you can attack" which is a good thing, preventing AC's, and the queue to claim, which might not be the best way of implementing a good idea.

If you allocated to the guild who contributed to the siege the most - the random tag-alongs wouldn't get it, the 2fg of some guild who just came to kill people wouldn't get it, it would be the people to built trebs and took the time to take the walls down, and then it would be the people who cleared out buildings on the inside that would get it, in all likely hood, the same guild that would (if the system were in place) have booked the claim weeks in advance.

AOC siege PvP works like this:
Border Keeps are not attackable. You can probably still roam around to get PvP experience (previously Blood Money).
Border Keeps get attackable when: Guild A has built one AND Guild B DECLARES WAR upon Guild A's BK.
The siege conflict is scheduled for 90 minutes during primetime on a weekday or weekend.
Guild A prepares defenses and Guild B prepares offensive measures (siege tent, siege weapons). Both sides may hire solo players or guilds as mercenaries (there will be a cap for this).
Guild B attacks the BK, where Guild A defends.
A winner will be decided, either B won and will be able to claim BK. Or Guild A won and will get some bonuses for defenses.
BK will be invulnerable for N days.
Repeat for all 9 BK's every N days.

We all have read how it will work, but how it will actually be like when playing it, only the devs know (siege pvp is not implemented on beta, but with the dev build).

It all makes sense until it requires a guild to be active in Mini-PvP (read: grinding) until they will be able to siege a BK (declare war, thus they must be the top N guild pvp wise on the server). Okay that made sense, those that want to PvP reap the benefits, but if this guild is big and does not require help? Tough luck! No siege pvp for you! Casual guilds only get raid content and Mini-pvp as endgame features.

And since they state that you can hire guilds and people to help, does this then imply that other people (read: roamers, bandits, etc) can not interfere / partake in this event? We don't know! And that is what sucks.

And yeah, it might be over-reacting. And to be frank noone knows how this will work in practice, we know so very little of this "grand-feature" of AOC. So no need to cancel pre-order damnit

 

[rynnor]

And since they state that you can hire guilds and people to help, does this then imply that other people (read: roamers, bandits, etc) can not interfere / partake in this event? We don't know! And that is what sucks.

My impression is that only the attacking guild + mercenaries will count towards 'tickets' to wrest control of the keep.

For those who havent read both defender and attackers accumulate 'tickets' through their actions - whichever side has the most tickets wins the keep.

But also as I understand it theres nothing to stop others not aligned to the 2 guilds from turning up for a rumble - expect massive fights

 

[LordjOX]

Okay, that clarifies abit. I thought it meant that the actual sieging would be inside some private instance. Or having some invulnerability mechanism for people involved in a siege. Now I'm actually abit excited.

 

[Vasconcelos]

As I understand it, its just a question of keep warfare. The rest of the border zone "rules" remain untouched.

If we want to compare with DAoC, its something like the roaming pvp, in this case not realm based but groupVSgroup (its not even guildVSguild per se), carries on, ppl in emain clashing all over the place, skirmishes and intercepting grps wtc... but when it comes to actually besiege a keep or taking control of it, it will be restricted to some guilds.

only prob that i see is, why counting only minigames? why not count all PvP actions (bar fights, minigames, open PvP in the border zones, etc...)?

 

[fettoken]

Well, they tend to change lots of stuff in the beginning of MMO´s so i wouldn´t think too much about potential flaws. Just think the pvp combat looks super special awsome!!! And with collision detection it will be strategyriffic! But being the PVE whore that i am.... oh man, its gunna be so freakkin awsome!!! (haven´t played an mmo for a year)

 

[Kremlik]

Wouldn't that force guilds out of world pvping into the instanced pvp to make sure they can attack keeps to open pvp?

A bit counterproductive isn't that?

 

[Ctuchik]

or they just recruit ppl into that guild that only likes to do the BG's.

 

[LordjOX]

Age Of Conan: Hyborian Adventures - Details on Siege PvP

Secondly, based on your feedback, we will give points when guild members gain PvP experience.

== Forum whine

 

[Vasconcelos]

Age Of Conan: Hyborian Adventures - Details on Siege PvP



== Forum whine

Why oh why they dont think about giving much more points for open PvP in the borders (like a 4:1 ratio open:minigames)???? Its just so straight thinking it makes me wonder if they ever played DAOC...

 

[BloodOmen]

Speaking of which the Open Beta officially starts tomorrow correct? the 1st?

 

[rynnor]

Speaking of which the Open Beta officially starts tomorrow correct? the 1st?

So I believe - you can patch your client now so your good to go!

I'm off on holiday till after the weekend tho tomorrow - ah well - it'll keep