Dominance feedback

[Rolf 3,563]

Hi,

 

so the Dominance round is over with Cauldron and all. It's not quite working like we hope - initial numbers were a lot lower for various reasons but it's still too steep falloff which is undesirable (there will of course be falloff since people will feel they are too far behind).

 

I saw some feedback in the thread about Dominance opening regarding suggested changes some of which apparently were debatable (returning champs and pmks) while others seemed to have more consensus (removing one kingdom).

 

Regarding quitting:

Please give feedback on why you didn't start playing this time around even if you considered it, or why you quit early on, or why you quit in the middle.

 

Also of course please give feedback on what you think should be improved or even better - what worked very poorly.

 

Rolf

[Kegan 3,926]

Whatever you do don't just throw money at it having larger prizes is not going to fix anything if it is fun they will play regardless of the prizes. 

[SmeJack 5,801]

imo, leave it one month but remove sorcery, moon metal, PMKs and tbh skilling as well. The fast skill gain is in the gap between so fast that its almost pointless and a chore at the beginning of each scenario like, I did it and sure its fast and only takes a few days to max all pvp related skills but that's still a few days of boring grinding just to get out of the way and im not really thrilled about doing it over and over and over. You can have like 60-70 pas just from making one plate set for yourself so whats the point in starting at 20 why not just make it 90 or hell even 100 it just seems silly to make it so fast and yet its still a chore to be done with. The other stuff are just things that create a gap between people and start to make some hesitate about who to fight or what to lose or not lose if you die. Everyone in basic gear will keep the raw battles longer I imagine, I dunno im no expert by any means but it just seems to kill the spirit of the server concept since wurm will literally always be a numbers game and the numbers will control the depots ect ect (the old 'only breeds the stronger growing stronger' crap), at least if everyone is wearing the same basic equipment some may relax a little more about who has how many people and just get in there a bit more. Im not saying people wont still cry about zergs that's inevitable no doubt but if the numbers seem more doable without having to weigh in things like buffs/moon metal and all the extra fancy stuff that changes power balance then maybe people will not be crying so fast about pvp dying *shrug*

 

*Edit: Just quietly I also think that the courier requirement for a turret is kinda silly, not only does it take almost a week to even have a priest to make them on a four week map it also forces the WL kingdoms to need someone to want to be Fo in the first place

[Lundu 293]

To spawn with armor and weapon was abit dull.

 

Make it 2 way war (remove one Kingdom)

[New_Unsleep 423]

Some suggestions

1. WL vs BL two kingdoms instead of three

2. remove starting with gear

3. Increase horse spawn rate

4. Increase crop growth rate and breeding rate

5. Nerf archery towers. Make it so you can block them

6. Make sure central depot is actually central

[Lunn 235]

Played first round, didn't play this round. It was fun but I enjoyed working on my chaos toon/deed more. Just dont have the time to split between two accounts.

 

Something should be done about converting though. From what I experience on the first map and heard about dominance, It was only possible to convert from a wl kingdom to bl.

[Chiqa 742]

After a few year s in Wurm and even starting on the first Dominance I have accepted I am a care bear and just don't fit into Wurm pvp mentality.  Combine that with I enjoy my main toon  allot and I had no reason to even try this round. My idea of pvp would be  toggle on toggle off and going to basttle arenas. Sorry Rolf, I know you love pvp.

[Redd 4,281]

I didn't play because I feel you are trying to split up the PvP community too much.

There simply isn't enough people in your game to justify chaos, epic and challenge. Pick two, one has got to go.

[JockII 338]

Was far to short

imp rates to slow.

Bring back calf shots.

BL v WL

Bl and wl where in retarded places.

nice map tho gj

[JockII 338]

I didn't play because I feel you are trying to split up the PvP community too much.

There simply isn't enough people in your game to justify chaos, epic and challenge. Pick two, one has got to go.

i always viewed challenge a a pvp test server, the perfect place to try out new mechanics and idea before they get sent to epic/chaos. I still stand by attaching challenge to epic and reducing the skill gain but allowing players to keep there chars as a way of "catching up" to join epic.

 

Although, i would prefer 1 big xananadu pmk only pvp server if i had the choice epic skill curve 1 /transfer for every wurm character to it.

[Pandalet 1,848]

I didn't bother because I have no interest in PvP.  I've already invested in my Freedom deed, and was starting to feel a bit burned out with the waves of griefing etc. over the last few months; the sudden focus on completely new stuff I'm not interested in just reinforces that.  I know some folks had a great time on Chaos v2, but personally, if that's the way the game's going, then it's time to look for something else to play.

[Firestarter 1,210]

I played it for a few days, but then the lag became unbearable for me

[Warlander 2,730]

The biggest problem is Wurm as the game itself - like I already said in another thread, most PvP players are looking for fast, disobliging game with progress loss after each short match or slow, but lasting progress. I am both PvE and PvP player myself, so from the second perspective I can try to say what is wrong with Wurm PvP.

In case of Wurm progress loss == skill loss.

Obligation == deeds unkeep and possible items/affinities loss

Chaos: slow, very obliging, no progress loss

Epic: rather slow, very obliging, no progress loss

Challenge: average speed (Wurm PvP will never be fast, at least in current state), slightly obligating (especially if someone is playing on other cluster, without playing on them you don't receive any lasting rewards), full progress loss

What might help Wurm PvP? I think that one of solutions would be adding PvP zones and optional PvP events to PvE servers with no skill/items loss and some rewards (affinities maybe? Freedomers seems to like them, but would never go to PvP servers to get them).

TL;DR - Wurm is a perfect PvE game, but there will always be problem with PvP aspect due to nature of the game.

[Elen 1,013]

I didn't play it due to not liking the griefing aspect of pvp and the constant strive to exploit whatever advantages haven't been patched out yet (assorted alt usage, etc.). Also turrets and fighting npcs is a huge turn off to me.

 

 

 

What might help Wurm PvP? I think that one of solutions would be adding PvP zones and optional PvP events to PvE servers with no skill/items loss and some rewards (affinities maybe? Freedomers seems to like them, but would never go to PvP servers to get them).

 

Truth.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Elen

[Hashirama 870]

First of all I would like to say that the challenge scenario was so much better, it appeared that people didn't like the last round and that's why didnt try this one. But this one was a very satisfying round. The reason why many didn't play this time would be caus of the last round I believe. 

What I would like to see changed:

 

1) WL vs BL (Because being MR sucked when no one was playing in it, so just 2 teams are fine I believe)

 

2) Horse rate increased and possibility to find more horses near starter towns.

 

3) More increase in armour QL per improve action. Actions are very fast, but pvp requirements are large like 80 QL weapon,shield,armour,horseshoes,bow,arrows. And even with the fast action timers, still takes 1-2 hours to get the gear ready. Make it something like every improve action increasing 10-20 QL, that would be amazing.

 

 

4) Starter armour should only be given out a number of times a day, like 2-3 times. Because people tend to use them as alts which can kill horses and distract their enemies while their mains move in to attack.

 

Everything else is fine, do not change any drops or anything. It was very well balanced compared to last challenge. The map was good, and flat lands are what pvp needs, not mountainous regions. Grasslands was a good idea, had ease to obtain cotton whenever I needed, overall this round was 300 times better than last one.

Edited February 27, 2015 by Hashirama

[Wurmhole 3,650]

I don't pvp anymore..

But if I did, I would never try it here, until I saw performance equality achieved. A very few people seem to have minimal lag, while a large percentage suffer 1000 ms+ lag between player input and client reaction. In many cases, 3+ seconds is the norm.

To me, it seems your only hope of a fair fight would be private player run servers and just a small group of people physically together on the same LAN.

Pve is survivable with crappy performance. Not great, but survivable. Pvp is impossible with poor performance and nobody ever wants to enter a battle knowing they have a 1+ second handicap.

"Bob and Joe, we are going to see who the better fighter is. Now bob, when I count to three, draw your sword and start attacking... Joe, on the count of 5,you draw yours... "

[Chiqa 742]

What might help Wurm PvP? I think that one of solutions would be adding PvP zones and optional PvP events to PvE servers with no skill/items loss and some rewards (affinities maybe? Freedomers seems to like them, but would never go to PvP servers to get them).

 

 

 

This^

[Nappy 1,369]

I played a bit of both the original challenge and this newer version. In each case I spent just under 4 hours and yet I couldn't get into the game.

 

I do play PVP stuff outside of wurm so it isn't that aspect.

 

Lack of permanence meant things I built or worked on weren't going to last. This could range from the common "why build anything" type comments right through to the combat side of things where the efforts your team makes to dominate the map have no lasting storyline. For two weeks you rule the world and then it's gone. No epic struggles of back and forth - no history.

 

The faster skillgain wasn't that big a deal to me either, was surprised about that. It seems the real freedom world has made me expect it to take time to achieve gains.

 

After about 4 hours of looking around, cutting trees, mining, exploring I just didn't have enough reason to come back, so I didn't.

 

Maybe having me spawn at a front line outpost would have been better because it would have forced instant engagement in helping my kingdom advance/defend and it would have got me thinking about the game from a combat viewpoint much quicker. If I was instantly thrust into battle right at the start then my focus would have shifted to helping and then eventually to improving my combat abilities/defences etc and maybe that would have been the glue that kept me in the game.

 

When I write this like this it seems like perhaps chaos is in my future for PVP. It will depend on what the real "team" experience is like on that server.

 

~Nappy

[urban 85]

This round was just too short and starter gear just ruined the whole Wurm feel of the game.

 

Wurm is Sandbox game where players make everything they use and fight with, by giving out starter gear it just didn't feel like Wurm at all.

 

I would much rather see a bigger map, make it back to 1 month and make horses their own spawn pool so that there is always horses to find in the wild, cause not having a horse just makes PVP impossible.

 

So for me to even consider playing next round:

 

• Bigger map but built the same way this was (about same size as Storm)
• At least 3 weeks long preferably 1 month long.
• No starter gear.
• Two kingdoms( no pmks)(WL vs BL or WL vs WL)
•  Increase horses spawn rate or insane increase in horse breeding speed (ex. gives birth within 24-48 IRL hours. With no traits)

 

One thing that could also be cool is some way to protect deeds from getting raided when no one is online.
It's just no fun to come online to find your deed raided and find out that there weren't any one online to protect it.

[sunsvortex 599]

From the perspective of a player who likes pvp in other games, just not in Wurm. I didnt play the second round because nothing really changed from the first round -meaning its still Wurm trying to do Rift or WOW style pvp.

 

Wurm is simply not suited to that style of pvp, its much more suited to EVE style pvp. Where there is strategy, preparation and planning. Meaningless pvp is fun at times, but ultimately, it has a very poor record of player retention. Not just here in Wurm but in every game I have ever played.

 

One of the biggest issues with pvp is its separation from the pve world. Its also slow and clunky, the graphics simply do not support fast enough character movements to make combat interesting, the meat shield feeling cannot be escaped for many players, creativity in building is limited and pigeonholed and its completely focused around groups as solo players quickly find themselves on the run hiding in caves. Its not an equal playing field and with the current structure of any of the flavors available, its hard to believe it will ever be an equal playing field. Combat is uninteresting and dull in that there are very few ways available for players of unequal skill to contribute.

 

The answer from my point of view is not so much tweaking the existing but a fundamental change in the way PVP is presented and implemented.

 

Rolf are you willing to take into consideration a fundamental change in pvp for WURM?

 

In my opinion its going to take some really big structural changes in order to get pvp to be viable. If your willing to consider some major structural changes the way forward is clear, at least to me.

 

Concepts

 

Gradient pvp

Specialization (Or as you call it - roleplaying)

Trade System

Naval Combat

 

None of those are going to be small, but you need to take all the things working against pvp and turn them into things that work for it, such as it being clunky and slow. What type of combat is slow and clunky??? siege warfare and quite possibly naval warfare. How about using specialization and naval combat to expand the number of options players have to contribute to a battle?? It doesnt have to be that all players are forced to be fighting directly, some indirect support of battles would allow many many options. How about using trade to push rationales for fighting in small groups and solo pvp?? There are many many many different ways to solve the problems with pvp, but they are simply going to take a new perspective and anew approach.

 

Are you willing to do this?

Edited February 27, 2015 by sunsvortex

[akaedis 429]

Theirs some good dominance feedback here: http://forum.wurmonline.com/index.php?/topic/119316-changes-for-next-round/

 

Things i disliked.

-Map: Supply depot being more north in hota 

-Map: Battle camps blocking good deed positions 

-Change: No kings/Champions, Hated this, If we were told before going in, much would've been different. Would like to see atleast kings make it back in

-Change: No "Big Supply Depots", Their needs to be big ones, Atleast one or resources spawning somewhere, Mass cotton is horribly hard to get.

-New: Starter Gear, It needs to be set to 5 sets of starter gear per day OR you have a respawn timer. Personally i prefer a respawn timer so if you die, and were fighting outside your deed, you can't just run back out and boom be re-geared and fight again. (Respawn timer would fix a LOT in "dominance")

[Ryon 21]

I don't know about BL vs WL, surely there would be a massive imbalance bias in favour of WL numbers, right?

[silakka 2,360]

Has to be longer and a highscore board where all points including overall are listed to 1account, maybe linked to forum account.

Give more to it than just $$$prizes, many go to there just to showoff and keep great overall score, after all it's very competitive

Id personally like more focus on something that takes less of devs time and that bigger majority of community could enjoy, not hardcore competitive ones.

1v1 type pvp zones in freedom. Bring pvp side to every server. Just flat out useless empty mountain(s) in excisting servers and make pvp areas there, aswell as add killtabs. Maybe not item loot reward, but rank and other tiny things.. Well sorry for off topic, but i think more could have a taste of this rather than a resetting challenge

[MetalDragon 1,630]

Personally I don't think you have a large enough player base to draw interest into all these servers. If the player base who were drawn to PvP increases by 500-1000 then I can see the interest in these servers to be better. One of the problems you also face is the fact that rewards can be given to the 'other servers' so Dominance will never be considered a real server. While I like the fact the server resets all the time, the skills also reset. Mentally when your skills get reset you feel like you need to grind again, regardless of how fast it is. It may just be worth to do away with skills on challenge.

I look at Challenge as a 'mini-game server for pvp'. Players will play on Freedom cluster or Epic cluster and just hop onto Challenge for a bit and see how it goes. Wurm PvP in it's current form is too long and drawn out, control land, raid villages etc so no one will stick around when their main accounts on the other servers also require a long and drawn out game play.

I can't see how to make it fun when it spans over a month. You may be able to draw large interest by literally making the server as a minigame server, where anyone can port over to it and if it can be coded, a system to play things like wurm-style Capture the flag or King of the Hill / Domination which last for an hour or two at a time which is randomised. If the purpose of challenge was to generate more interest in the future, I'm not sure how this mini-game idea would assist unless it was a premium only idea or introduce Pay to Win features (not a good idea!!)

[Rhiannone 55]

I don't bother with Challenge because that's not the game I came to play. I am aware that your original idea for Epic was to have it work similar to how Challenge works and that it was more of a testing idea in the first place. The problem with that is, Epic went on for far too long evolving and growing, with no news or updates from anyone on progression of this idea. Now, for those who play Epic, its home. When I first starting playing I was unaware of this initial plan that Epic would be a 'revolving' server. I grew to love the game and my home here. All serious thoughts that everything was supposed to be only temporary had long ago slipped from the minds of older players into more of a subconscious memory. Now, you want to start up a new server, Challenge, and expect those who spent years of work on Epic to just jump on the bandwagon and forget everything they worked so hard for in the past. While I am sure there are some who will do so, the fact that this thread exists screams that many will not. Meanwhile, adding more and more features that seem to do nothing more than cause more and more bugs, more and more frustration has this game taking 2 steps forward and 3 steps back.

 

Again, I understand that the idea of Challenge has been long in the works. I can see how it could be quite exciting and challenging fun for anyone interesting in that type of game play. Under other circumstances I would possibly be interested in trying it out as well. However, I just don't think the plan itself is ready enough to keep a large player base interested.