Mythic Responds To Blizzard, Announces New WAR Classes

Andy Chalk

One Flag, One Fleet, One Cat
Nov 12, 2002
45,698
1
0
Mythic Responds To Blizzard, Announces New WAR Classes


Mark Jacobs of Warhammer Online [http://www.mythicentertainment.com/], and also revealed that two of the character classes that were cut prior to the game's release are being put back in.

Speaking to World of Warcraft [http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/16/world-of-warcraft-game-director-on-warhammer-online/] Game Director Jeff Kaplan said that he plays Warhammer Online, but the server he plays on is unbalanced, and leveling his character is taking longer than he likes. "I'm at the point where I'm thinking about quitting because it feels like the best way to level up is in the battlegrounds," he said. "But it takes me 30 to 45 minutes to get in the battleground queue. And then when I'm not in the queue, I'm trying to do the Public Quests. But I find that I'm either griefing other people in the Public Quests to try to get influence, or that there's just nobody there." He also pointed out that the Warhammer interface "looks very familiar" to that of World of Warcraft, saying, "The WoW interface did a lot of things, and I think people would be silly not to learn lessons from it. Any savvy game developer is going to play a lot of other games and pick from the best."

Contacted for comments of his own, Jacbos told Dark Age of Camelot [http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/10/16/ea-mythic-defends-warhammer-online-from-wow-criticism/].

"If you look at Warhammer, there were so many points [where] we consciously made the decision not to be like WoW and to try to push the envelope," Jacobs said. "I think you'll find that if you're actually going to compare the two products, I would say WoW is certainly a more polished game now than Warhammer is - of course they've had four years and billions of dollars - but if you look at the innovations in Warhammer, you'd be hard-pressed to find as many in WoW."

"This is not a sprint; it's a marathon," he continued. "We are in this for the long haul and the real test of how great Warhammer and WoW are will sort themselves out, and that won't be in the next three months. It's going to be a lot longer."

To that end, Jacobs also announced today that two of the classes cut from the original release version of Warhammer Online, the Black Guard and the Knight of the Blazing Sun, will be added in December. "We have very special plans around their appearance and in our next newsletter we will provide full details about that exciting and rather novel event," he wrote in a VE3D [http://herald.warhammeronline.com/warherald/NewsArticle.war?id=386]). "When they were cut from the game launch plans earlier this year, I said that the Black Guard and the Knight would be part of WAR only when they were great and deserved their place alongside all of WAR's other compelling classes. I also said that we would not charge any additional fees for this new content or put it in a separate expansion pack; that's not how we operate. We've kept to that plan and with the introduction of these two classes, Mythic shows that once again we are happy to keep giving players more value for their subscription dollars than any other MMORPG developer."


Permalink
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
He also pointed out that the Warhammer interface "looks very familiar" to that of World of Warcraft
Wasn't WoW's interface pretty much ripped from another MMO though, as I recall? :s Correct me if I'm wrong here people.

"We are in this for the long haul
Good. Competition breeds improvement, and I think WAR might finally give WoW the competition that I'm after.
 

Acervusvlos

New member
Aug 30, 2008
58
0
0
Mythic sounds like a good ol' Mom and Pop company. They may not be the most popular joint, but they cut their customers deals, and allow them to have cool things.

I like Mythic alot :3
 

Joeshie

New member
Oct 9, 2007
844
0
0
I find it funny that he criticizes Warhammer for long queues, considering that you could queue up to 2-3 hours just to get into a battleground if you were Alliance.

That being said, I have no problems joining scenarios as an Order because we are vastly outnumbered, lol.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Joeshie post=7.74282.829436 said:
I find it funny that he criticizes Warhammer for long queues, considering that you could queue up to 2-3 hours just to get into a battleground if you were Alliance.

That being said, I have no problems joining scenarios as an Order because we are vastly outnumbered, lol.
All depends on your server. My battlegrounds queues when I was playing was 2-3 minutes for AB, WSG and EotS and about 10 minutes for AV. I'd pop in the queue for one of the smaller ones until AV popped. Helped grab me a few extra honour points and was more efficient than sitting around Shattrath. That said, I can't comment on other servers, the main issue with long BG queue times is to do with server population, something which Mythic have already said they're trying to fix by offering a number of incentives to playing on the lower-populated faction while there's a population imbalance.
 

Scorched_Cascade

Innocence proves nothing
Sep 26, 2008
1,399
0
0
Joeshie post=7.74282.829436 said:
I find it funny that he criticizes Warhammer for long queues, considering that you could queue up to 2-3 hours just to get into a battleground if you were alliance.
I played horde around the time wow first came out (on the realm bladestorm) and on and off after (till i finally quit) and I can say with conviction WoW battlegrounds were shockingly bad when they first came out. Wait times were so bad that you joined the queue when you began your morning/day/evenings playing and went questing while you waited and then considered yourself lucky if you got into a battleground at all before you were done playing for the day. Also battlegrounds are handled with players from within the realm meaning if your realm is heavily stacked one way or the other (as they all are) one side gets massive wait queues. Whereas I hear that (I havent actualy played it) in WO the battlegrounds are realm v realm.

All in all the blizzard spokesman comes of as pulling both the "well we don't really care about them because WoW is too successful to worry" and the backup plan of "well they copied us anyway" in case WO actual does overtake.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Scorched_Cascade post=7.74282.829470 said:
Joeshie post=7.74282.829436 said:
I find it funny that he criticizes Warhammer for long queues, considering that you could queue up to 2-3 hours just to get into a battleground if you were alliance.
I played horde around the time wow first came out (on the realm bladestorm) and on and off after (till i finally quit) and I can say with conviction WoW battlegrounds were shockingly bad when they first came out. Wait times were so bad that you joined the queue when you began your morning/day/evenings playing and went questing while you waited and then considered yourself lucky if you got into a battleground at all before you were done playing for the day. Also battlegrounds are handled with players from within the realm meaning if your realm is heavily stacked one way or the other (as they all are) one side gets massive wait queues. Whereas I hear that (I havent actualy played it) in WO the battlegrounds are realm v realm.

All in all the blizzard spokesman comes of as pulling both the "well we don't really care about them because WoW is too successful to worry" and the backup plan of "well they copied us anyway" in case WO actual does overtake.
Things have changed in WoW since the time you describe. WoW's battlegrounds and arenas now run on Battlegroups which are a bunch of servers (different numbers of servers in different battlegroups, they're not evenly spaced) that have linked Battlegrounds and Arenas. It's all cross realm these days.
 

TsunamiWombat

New member
Sep 6, 2008
5,870
0
0
Amnestic post=7.74282.829476 said:
Scorched_Cascade post=7.74282.829470 said:
Joeshie post=7.74282.829436 said:
I find it funny that he criticizes Warhammer for long queues, considering that you could queue up to 2-3 hours just to get into a battleground if you were alliance.
I played horde around the time wow first came out (on the realm bladestorm) and on and off after (till i finally quit) and I can say with conviction WoW battlegrounds were shockingly bad when they first came out. Wait times were so bad that you joined the queue when you began your morning/day/evenings playing and went questing while you waited and then considered yourself lucky if you got into a battleground at all before you were done playing for the day. Also battlegrounds are handled with players from within the realm meaning if your realm is heavily stacked one way or the other (as they all are) one side gets massive wait queues. Whereas I hear that (I havent actualy played it) in WO the battlegrounds are realm v realm.

All in all the blizzard spokesman comes of as pulling both the "well we don't really care about them because WoW is too successful to worry" and the backup plan of "well they copied us anyway" in case WO actual does overtake.
Things have changed in WoW since the time you describe. WoW's battlegrounds and arenas now run on Battlegroups which are a bunch of servers (different numbers of servers in different battlegroups, they're not evenly spaced) that have linked Battlegrounds and Arenas. It's all cross realm these days.
Yeah, but WoW has been running for years. WAR has been out for a few short months.
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
TsunamiWombat post=7.74282.829494 said:
Amnestic post=7.74282.829476 said:
Scorched_Cascade post=7.74282.829470 said:
Joeshie post=7.74282.829436 said:
I find it funny that he criticizes Warhammer for long queues, considering that you could queue up to 2-3 hours just to get into a battleground if you were alliance.
I played horde around the time wow first came out (on the realm bladestorm) and on and off after (till i finally quit) and I can say with conviction WoW battlegrounds were shockingly bad when they first came out. Wait times were so bad that you joined the queue when you began your morning/day/evenings playing and went questing while you waited and then considered yourself lucky if you got into a battleground at all before you were done playing for the day. Also battlegrounds are handled with players from within the realm meaning if your realm is heavily stacked one way or the other (as they all are) one side gets massive wait queues. Whereas I hear that (I havent actualy played it) in WO the battlegrounds are realm v realm.

All in all the blizzard spokesman comes of as pulling both the "well we don't really care about them because WoW is too successful to worry" and the backup plan of "well they copied us anyway" in case WO actual does overtake.
Things have changed in WoW since the time you describe. WoW's battlegrounds and arenas now run on Battlegroups which are a bunch of servers (different numbers of servers in different battlegroups, they're not evenly spaced) that have linked Battlegrounds and Arenas. It's all cross realm these days.
Yeah, but WoW has been running for years. WAR has been out for a few short months.
I'm fully aware of that and I wasn't making any negative points about either game. I was merely correcting Scorced_Cascade's point concerning 'within the realm' battlegrounds which have changed since then (they changed a fairly long while ago actually, but that's besides the point).
 

cleverlymadeup

New member
Mar 7, 2008
5,256
0
0
Malygris post=7.74282.828134 said:
"I'm at the point where I'm thinking about quitting because it feels like the best way to level up is in the battlegrounds," he said. "But it takes me 30 to 45 minutes to get in the battleground queue. And then when I'm not in the queue, I'm trying to do the Public Quests. But I find that I'm either griefing other people in the Public Quests to try to get influence, or that there's just nobody there."
am i the only person who noticed how wrong this is?

1. WoW servers are HORRIBLY unbalanced, they even say "tough luck if it's unbalanced"
2. you can't really grief in War, most public quests aren't flagged rvr and most players aren't rvr yet
3. in WoW i can get up to lvl 10 in about 3 hours if that, WAR takes a LOT longer to get to lvl 10

so when he's saying that, i'm guessing he's not being completely on the lvl about it.
 

stormcaller

New member
Sep 6, 2008
2,314
0
0
I dont get why this is considered a game war, well..I did a little when it was first announced but like said in the article its more a never-ending race then a war. A race between a guy whos been running for years and another guy who has alot of sprinting to do whereas most other challengers burned out.
 

Asehujiko

New member
Feb 25, 2008
2,119
0
0
Blizzard: We \played your game and here's a few point that require some attention, based on our first hand experience with both your and our own game.
Mythic: We are more original then you and somewhere in the far future we will sell better then you too so shut up.

Where the hell is that originality war's guys keep ranting about? And don't bring up realm vs realm again because it's a fucking lie and should have been named faction vs faction from the start, which was done before by a crap ton of games before, wow among the more notable ones. True realm vs realm is as far as i know still unique to wow.
 

Medic Heavy

New member
Jul 4, 2008
240
0
0
Joeshie post=7.74282.829436 said:
I find it funny that he criticizes Warhammer for long queues, considering that you could queue up to 2-3 hours just to get into a battleground if you were Alliance.

That being said, I have no problems joining scenarios as an Order because we are vastly outnumbered, lol.

*sobs*....There's just so many greenskins
 

TOGSolid

New member
Jul 15, 2008
1,509
0
0
What's with all the WAR news on this site recently consisting of half the article being a Blizzard employee patting WAR on the head and trying go "aww you're so cute."

Is there something wrong with just saying "oh hey here's an open letter from the WAR guys?"
 

cainx10a

New member
May 17, 2008
2,191
0
0
Asehujiko post=7.74282.831152 said:
Blizzard: We \played your game and here's a few point that require some attention, based on our first hand experience with both your and our own game.
Mythic: We are more original then you and somewhere in the far future we will sell better then you too so shut up.

Where the hell is that originality war's guys keep ranting about? And don't bring up realm vs realm again because it's a fucking lie and should have been named faction vs faction from the start, which was done before by a crap ton of games before, wow among the more notable ones. True realm vs realm is as far as i know still unique to wow.
(i) Open World PvP
Warhammer has special zone with Keeps and Flags, capturing these give players access to special trainers and merchants, and RvR bonuses. Killing players give both Exp and Renown Points to unlock better armor. Letting the enemy hold a keep can has disastrous consequences in the long run as this will give them the chance to strike at your fortresses and finally, your city.

In WoW, oh yeah, you can smack the red dudes that you meet once in a while. If you are bored, get a group of 100 people and raid a city (Did you get anything out of it, did you put the other faction out of business and won the war, NO)

(ii) Scenarios
Warhammer - Easily accessible anywhere you are, whenever you want. Queues wait on med-to-high pop servers are usually in seconds or up to a few minutes during peak times.

WoW - Fly to city, find a battleground npc, wait in a queue to join up the bg.

(iii) Arenas
Due to WARhammer zergy nature of pvp, it's missing, as the dev did mention they want to see armies fighting skirmishes rather than a group of players (2-4-6 etc ...)

WoW - Sexcellent. I really love smaller scale warfare.

So, for World PvP and massive pvp rather, I would go with WAR. WoW is good for it's PvE, Arenas that's about it. There is no actually Alliance vs Horde in the game, nothing that change the outcome of the world if Silvana was killed by a bunch of marauding humans.

Edit: there is a lot more I didn't mention, as I am still working on discovering the game more and more. The PvE is still unclear for me, as in, Dungeons and such, there is a lack of interest in running them, despite the gears drop etc ...
 

Amnestic

High Priest of Haruhi
Aug 22, 2008
8,946
0
0
Warhammer has special zone with Keeps and Flags, capturing these give players access to special trainers and merchants, and RvR bonuses. Killing players give both Exp and Renown Points to unlock better armor. Letting the enemy hold a keep can has disastrous consequences in the long run as this will give them the chance to strike at your fortresses and finally, your city.

In WoW, oh yeah, you can smack the red dudes that you meet once in a while. If you are bored, get a group of 100 people and raid a city (Did you get anything out of it, did you put the other faction out of business and won the war, NO)
WoW's 6 (Nagrand, Terrokar Forest, Zangarmarsh, Hellfire Peninsula, Silithus and Easter Plaguelands) world PvP zones with Objectives seek to disagree. The lattermost two only offer zonewide buffs to your faction, the previous four offer a variety of items and equipment from vendors that would otherwise not be accessible in addition to a zonewide buff. Not as deep as WARs perhaps, in that it doesn't really change anything in the long run, but it's there and that's something you can't contest.
 

ward.

New member
Aug 6, 2008
401
0
0
I thought the WAR interface was customizable? So the only way it can look like WOW is if he personally designed it that way?