Patch Notes 1.0.3.9 Discussion
- Thread starter finegamingconnoisseur
- Start date
Yes MO1 was complete aids lmao. But honestly that's what made it fun. I obviously wish they could have fixed some of the issues, like making it so you cant get griefed trying to duel in town. but the ability to get these shit fights in the GY and stuff, getting jumped constantly, people trying to grief you who you can grief back, made so many opportunities for fun. And MO2 just has none of them, so its just boring 95% of the time.
yea but none of us ever really went grey off BBers it'd just be like lol this dude tryin to BB, what a ho, then you shame him in chat. Dudes in wars trying to BB. Was just sad. Annoying. MO1 wasn't aids as much as it had an unfinished vibe. YOU could be AIDS in MO1 tho haha.
I'm still struck... I still don't understand what happened. I had this moment on Sat where I usually come and post how much MO2 pisses me off or how to fix it, and I was just like... y'know what... nah.
I wonder what they could patch in. I wonder if siege will help. I think gam is stymied. Buy orders are cool nstuff, but eh. Like I said, my mind is blown when I really compare MO1 to MO2. Even tho MO1 was hot ASS at times... MO2 just doesn't even seem like the same genre.
@ patch, same pov: nah.
Hot Ass perfectly describes MO1. But it was so fun. It perfectly captured a cruel dark world where you could dunk or be dunked around every corner that had a player. And MO2 just has nothing on that, and only gets farther away from it.
I know the exact feeling. Its giving up on this game ever getting good, and knowing Sv wont listen to good advice to make it better.
I feel like theres no magic 1 thing they can do. The entire game direction has just been bad, for the majority of players. Theres a few who want to do nothing by themselves in a empty sandbox and they think this games fantastic. But for the rest of us, we're screwed. Some people say when TC comes out the game will boom. People also cried for years that TC is what killed MO1. Imagine how dead towns will be if we have this current pop, but 70% of the player base is now sitting in their Tc instead of in town. They need to make a lot of changes for this game to get anywhere near its potential, and I don't think they will. Or if they ever do, it will be too late.
Last edited:
I think we can agree that a place where easy low-risk pvp happens without having to ride around randomly for 20-40mins would be good, as you're describing the GY in MO1. There should be places like that near or within cities, arenas with functional mechanics would be a cool option just for a start.
On the other hand, I will say I think you and others have very rose-tinted glasses on when thinking back on MO1. I played it in its early days, and I can say without any hesitation that MO2 is, to me, way more fun & functional. The combat, just for starts, was terrible in early MO1. If you think MO2 hitboxes are bad, early MO1 would floor you.
Yes and no. MO1 was obviously shit, and had infinite issues. The part that makes it feel like I dont have rose tinted glasses, is I had a blast playing MO1. No matter how many times I salted and rage quit because I died to some complete bs bug or mechanic, I'd always come back. MO2 I just have no will to even log in. I know that epic time isnt going to be there. The few good times I had in MO2 have nothing on the good times from MO1. The game tries to limit it by adding more walking, more timers, more standing loss, etc.
A few weeks ago me and my friend decided to log into MO2. And we had a staple MO1 experience. I killed some guy and his friend in the Gy, and he then came back 5 mins later with his friend in way better gear. and then they died again lmao. It can happen. But the rest of my time on MO2 is just nothing. MO1 takes less time to check places for players. You can relog to different towns / characters. Thievery was possible because standing wasnt a thing. You could instigate fights because graying cant make you lose standing. Etc. MO2 is built to limit the ways you can have fun and start conflict.
What I do in MO2 is worse for the game than what I did in MO1 half the time. Because MO1 I was usually blue and avoided MC. They only died if I could get them to hit me. Which isnt really griefing. MO2 I have nothing better to do than log in red and check GY because roaming takes forever and I dont haev any alts to switch to and cant get town pvp any other way.
Last edited:
Yeah, I can see what you're saying re: the size of the map, the single character system, & the penalties for RPKing essentially just meaning longer wait times. I think if there was more to do in general in and around cities, and more mechanics surrounding cities, this might be less of an issue... I think buy-orders & bounty-hunters are at least a little tip-toe step in the right direction, but nothing that will really ameliorate the situation long-term.
I can't say I'm fond of the RPK/flag/MC system in general, nor did I think MO1 had a great system in this regard. If they did scrap it for something less tedious, convoluted, and exploitable, I think there would need to be more mechanics for new players, cities & alliance building etc. in general. I think the game could benefit tremendously from some form of system that creates more of an overarching straightforward funnel to pvp-- the reason I was pitching the idea of having this 'funnel' tied to cities is, this is an example of something that would make PvP universal and easy to participate in by anyone, while still allowing guilds a great degree of freedom.
I think even fleshed out GvG alliances will still feel like a 'dead-pvp system' for many people to some extent, since there are so many guilds, and so much territory that they range. With a world this size, I don't think it will create a dynamic where you are frequently out and about and happen to run into war-targets, considering how piecemeal alliances will potentially be. But, if you were in a guild signed up with Meduli & ranging up towards Tindrem, who Meduli is at war with, you have a PvP front that will just happen naturally... And then, you can still have your guilds who aren't signed to cities, showing up in the area just to wreak havoc. That's basically what I was saying, something like that, that uses the games' massive geography to its advantage, might make PvP more active/fun for beginners & vets alike.
(Obviously I don't think this would be easy to implement, nor that it necessarily will be; just that I think the general idea would be great for the PvP, and still hold true for the people who enjoy the game for its immersion; ie. 'I'm just a craftsman but I know my city is at war with Meduli, so I'll try to slip out & head towards Fabernum to mine/hunt/cut-wood,' whatever. It would also give new-players a non-committal place in the world immediately. You could just join some small/dead guild & immediately be part of a wider, more powerful faction with various objectives)
It's my opinion that the game needs a more delineated system for PvP to take place, pretty much for the reasons you are describing. We'll see if, when sieging, wardecs & alliances are fleshed out more, if it creates this. I have my doubts, but would be pleasantly surprised if it did. I do sympathize with devs trying to avoid the game being just some grief-cesspit, though. That wouldn't be great for the game long-term. Thing is, currently, the deterrents aren't conductive to creating meaningful PvP, while the punishment for MC is just to stop playing for x amount of days, or have a more tedious res-walk. Probably not ideal for anyone.
Last edited:
You playing the wrong game lol...
This is an mmo... not kill every single person you see battle royale. This is the reason why so many players like you and people who play like you have so much to complain about. The devs are actively making a game that rails against this style of play.
What you want is your cake and eat it too.
Well its a sandbox game firstmost and that means the community creates the content using the tools placed into the sandbox.
If most of this games community treats it like a survival game instead of a Role Playing game then uts a survival game despite what ever the dev labels utm
If most of this games community treats it like a survival game instead of a Role Playing game then uts a survival game despite what ever the dev labels utm
Its funny though because gear in this game is easily replacable. Its not like people are dropping some rare item that took months of farming and guild DKP to purchase with a low drop chance.. hell, I can farm enough ore for 20 sets of steel in 1 day that lasts months.
These dudes out here killing naked miners and people at the gravyard or some guy leaving town to pick flowers, or some guy minding his business fishing for seemingly no reason other than pennies are toxic to the community. It is no wonder the devs seem to make life harder for them with every other patch. They care about those pennies because they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the game. They are frustrated mechanics dont favor their playstyle because of this dilemma.
On one hand I get it, tc/seige isnt here yet. But you have to ask, will theybreally stop this behavior when it is? I think not, i think this is how they think the game is supposed to be. Ita why they will always only find a place in beta guilds.
I think most of us can agree many of the 'sandbox-tool' mechanics are very cool and good concepts, if not necessarily implemented in the best way currently. I think most of us would agree these are the types of things that make the game stand-out.
Having dynamic player-driven mechanics to direct player-action makes player-driven things happen more effectively than a laissez-faire 'you have to do everything with no mechanics' philosophy ever could. For example, having auction houses, personal dwellings/fortresses/territories, guilds, banks, etc. facilitates/simulate ownership/factionalism/economy etc. far better than not having them. These are mechanics that direct players, and technically take away from "the player is the 'end all be all' for content" philosophy, but most of us would agree that in practice they facilitate the world to function as a more realistic/dynamic/meaningful sandbox.
These kinds of dynamic systems will always be better governed by in game mechanics than individuals bringing pen to paper and organizing things out of game, because, frankly, that leaves a huge swathe of players out of the loop entirely, and is a logistical nightmare to keep track of that can rapidly collapse if a few key players quit the game. People asking for tc/sieges etc., fleshing out those sandbox mechanics, yeah, those are 100% the facet of the game I'm talking about. I just don't think it should end there. This type of content will do worlds more for the type of game MO2 is than introducing new continents\skills\items, when the content already implemented for continents/skills/items are not even fleshed or balanced out yet.
Anyway, it's easy to be an armchair developer, but I want to be on record saying this because this is the stuff that makes MO2 unique. Not just PKing; you can kill other players in tons of games. Not just full-loot; you can loot people in tons of games. Not just territory control; there are games that have perfectly implemented domination type matches. Not just economy; games like EVE or Second Life have that as their bread & butter. Where a game like this shines is in world-building. Building dynamic sandbox mechanics that act as interplaying synergistic systems that players can interact with to various results economically, territorially, factionally, etc. etc.
That's basically why my feeling is, "yeah, buy-orders are a good baby step... don't really care about accessories guess it's good filler content albeit probably just more being added to the 'needs-balancing' plate".
NAH. You guys just don't get what we are here for. Br games suck. Every kill is meaningless. Play another game repeat. They can be a bit of fun, but they dont have the weight that a game like MO has. MO when you kill something, it creates bad blood. You get killed, you can try to get them back. You attack someone in a guild you dont like. The guy you killed comes back in better gear to try and get revenge. Brings more friends. I've had so many engagements in MO that werent just random fights. They hated me and wanted to kill my ass, or they were someone I wanted to kill. You can only truly get this in games like MO. There's no other servers to go to. and the game doesnt just end and you never see them again. My favorite moment in MO2 sofar was when me and my friend killed these 2 random guys outside bakti, was nothing special. And then a few mins later we were going to town, and they came out with a 3rd guy, all in way better gear, to try and kill us. We almost lost, kited, and ended up killings all 3 of them. and when we won it was suepr hype. You dont get moments like that in shitty instant play Br games.
I can go out to eat with my friend and we could talk the whole time about assorted MO1 memories we have. Like they were events that really happened with memorable people. You don't get that in other games like BR's.
This is also just cuz MO2's 1 char system and eco suck. In MO1 killing random tind gy fighter kids for their mol and steel swords added up, and had value to them. And better gear definitely had value.
Yeah, but basically your point is that the reason the pvp is more fun is because it has an actual world with gravity behind it. I think in a certain sense you're both kind of in agreement. Because, the thing is, that is the same reason that people who aren't particularly interested in RPKing play and enjoy the game. It's the gravity of a simulated world, with the fact that you can kill/loot or be killed/looted contributing a good deal to said gravity, that is the product/focus/unique-feature.
The whole point of MO & games like it isn't just that you can kill people & loot, but that killing people, and consequently every other activity, has gravity. If all you wanted was to kill other players, you could just play a BR, or Rust, or Mordhau, or any other of the vast number of games whose primary objective is killing other players. But that's really not what the product is here.
Last edited:
I mean..you cant... we koto have hammered down a few strongholds but...that isnt seiging.
I agree with most of your post here... however.. given my previous statment regarding the "pennies" of value current gear is... there really is no point in killing people in the GY or naked miners or flower pickers or some guy in throwaway gear farming bandits etc. etc.
The only thing you get is some sort of grief accomplishment.. if the gear was worth something, sure. It would be understandable. But it isnt... even steel is now easily replacable by dedicated hardcore players...and lets be honest here... the remaining players here after the player count has dropped ARE the hardcore players.
I dont even care when I die. I just regear at the nearest town where i have stashed go bags or one of my 3 houses each stocked with gear. Theres also the fact that more experienced players purposely wear trash gear when farming to make lost gear even more meaningless.
It all boils down to a near pointless pvp system where death is merely a temporary moment of inconvenience griefed and the griefer gets a moments worth of dopamine for killing some guy whos at half health fighting a zombie or has his/her back turned farming calx.
To my point and yours, many of these rpk'ers become irate every time a patch messes with their game loop like !guards! Or door timers, or priest changes they feel the need to come here and cry about it when the reality is the real problem is what weve said here... the pvp is pointless.
So i do get the gripe from both sides red and blue but i really cant wrap my head around the killing noobs in the GY mentality or some guy by himself at a bandit camp wearing ironbone scraps. Pointless.
The real rewards come in competative group fights or bounty hunting where people are wearing steel/tungsteel real bragging rights for winning or surviving etc.
The game desperately needs tc/seige
Yeah, a bit of extra guidance & motivation would be cool. Actual gravity or meaning to winning or losing. I personally would love some more inclusive, overarching guidance to PvP... Hopefully proper TC/sieging does accomplish some of this.
Just to dream a bit here if you'll humor me, but a game like this with city-state type factions, war-declarations and war-goals, (similar to a game like Crusader Kings or Total War) with mechanics for tribute or flat sums to be paid, vassal status (tribute + loss of ability to conduct your own foreign policy/war-decs, alliances,etc.), and mechanics that allow rebelling/counter-wars to undo the measures at some cost, all as potential consequences for losing wars would be awesome. Of course I don't know how you'd really implement it to have it work. Maybe you'd have different costs to declare war depending on what you want the end result to be, and if you lose the war you have to pay that amount out as reparations. For example, if you want them to have to pay x flat amount, you need to put 1.25 times x amount on the line, and reparations scale higher and higher depending on how ambitious your war-goal aims are(with vassalization being the highest/costliest). Maybe there is some kind of TC + kill count over x amount of time that the war takes place to determine the winner. Not sure how you'd really do it, but I think it would be awesome. The beauty in allowing vassal-status but not outright conquering, everyone is still technically in the game; taking over the entire map means you have to be able to continuously, or at least periodically, win rebellion/independence wars to put down unruly vassal-states. It would never be a situation where you literally own everyone, you'd just be their overlord/hegemon. It would ensure a continuous gameplay loop of warfare.
I'm just saying, that's the kind of dynamic PvP system I'd love to see in a full loot PvP MMO. I feel like that kind of mechanic is still sandbox, while also being more guided/inclusive/purposeful than GvG territory control could ever be. Tons of gravity to the result of pvp: if we lose, we have to pay tribute to 'x' state for two weeks & lose our ability to conduct foreign policy until we win a rebellion war against them, etc... But, yeah, I know it's not really a realistic suggestion for any MMO atm for manifold reasons, including the details of how to implement it properly, & I'm sure myriad other mechanical/performance/logistical challenges.
Last edited:
I was really hoping MO1 factions was going to be this. But it bombed and then they just left it to die instead of trying to make it better. Militia town fights are as close as it gets to inclusive now., and those are really scuffed and people go grey and kill each other, or grey and then the town they are defending kills them. As usual, a better well made flagging system would help.
D
Deleted member 44
Guest