@Iatros said:
No, IMO, the game cannot be fixed because many of its core elements and artistic approaches are impossible to change, like being a boring cartoony moba.
Some things can be changed, esp the game breaking bugs, yet the most essential one, the game server's that create input lag needs a great investment, they are unwilling to make.
Too many strategical wrong choices were made, that now cannot be fixed, the should respect the fans before the finalise the game, now it is too late...
Thanks for your valuable input.
Actually there is a way for a temporal fix at least.
Unleash the Orks as a free race, so making the game partially F2play, the free player would only handle the Orks, the least seen race.
The free players would get standard doctrines, no SP, no skins and after a hundred completed battles, they could get a reduction to buy the full game.
Hmmm, considering the F2P model is part and parcel of MOBAs(*), I reckon a good part of the community would have the proverbial stroke. Personally I'm not sure it would work well for the community or the game. It could ramp up the population, sure, but that would also imply potential added infrastructure and customer service costs. And without changing some fundamental aspects about the game, like bringing in more stuff to do with skulls (more doctrines? more cosmetics?), as well as without putting in more things to unlock, I can't see the numbers staying high.
I'd like to see if they could sell the armies individually, like they did with CoH2. Start the split now, with 3 army packs (SM, Eldar and Ork), and then put cosmetic DLC around that. And let those modular sales bring in the funds to release additional armies and cosmetics. Make it mimic more the tabletop/collector's experience. Definitely throw in free camera zoom and sync. kills (at least for a singleplayer or non-ranked mode). Make the most out of the fact 40K has a lot going for it in the looks.
*And before someone comes out brandishing a burning pitchfork, yes, the F2P model is present on other genres (MMOs, shooters, etc). My point is that there isn't a successful MOBA that's not F2P as well. Putting in F2P on DoW3 would certainly reduce the list of reasons why it isn't a MOBA, even if it does have some elements of it.
@Iatros said:
No, IMO, the game cannot be fixed because many of its core elements and artistic approaches are impossible to change, like being a boring cartoony moba.
Some things can be changed, esp the game breaking bugs, yet the most essential one, the game server's that create input lag needs a great investment, they are unwilling to make.
Too many strategical wrong choices were made, that now cannot be fixed, the should respect the fans before the finalise the game, now it is too late...
Thanks for your valuable input.
Actually there is a way for a temporal fix at least.
Unleash the Orks as a free race, so making the game partially F2play, the free player would only handle the Orks, the least seen race.
The free players would get standard doctrines, no SP, no skins and after a hundred completed battles, they could get a reduction to buy the full game.
As free2play mod, it should be a faction you don't have now, Like Necrons or Chaos.
Honestly Gorb it's hard to even decide where to begin a response for that massive wall of text. At this point I'm not even sure what you're trying to prove. I suggested you take that kind of entirely personal, massively-thread derailing post to PM, but instead you've opted to drag it on to the forums - a curious choice. There's obviously no constructive purpose for it, since the entire post barely skirts the actual subject matter and reads more like a long-winded denunciation and personal dressing-down than anything. I'll leave it to you to explain your "reasoning".
The worst and most frustrating thing, however, is that whole post is so mind-blowingly hypocritical that I literally can't understand how you don't see it. You're literally doing everything you're criticizing me for in that post:
Massive thread derailment? Check
Critique of the poster, rather than the actual post? Oh ya.
Criticism of the writer's style, rather than their content? Clearly.
Declarative assumptions about the other poster's intent? Mhmm
Accusations of bias in the application of reasoning? Unreal.
As I said before, I'm not at all comfortable having a public pis**** contest with the moderator on the forums. When I take issue with your arguments, I use direct quotes to make it absolutely clear what I'm contesting and I always explain why. In this case, I made it perfectly clear what I was arguing and rather than argue that, you went off the tracks and got extremely personal.
If you aren't comfortable with it, take it to PMs instead of continually antagonizing someone you appear to be actively trying to undermine for no apparent reason.
Your post reads like this is exactly what you want.
You should stay away from this , this is between amoc and gorb.
This isn't a ring around two fighters. It's a discussion on a public forum thread. I never would have had the opportunity to respond if Amoc had actually taken the discussion to a PM instead of stringing it along and playing the "this makes me uncomfortable" victim angle. I see Amoc trying to paint an emotional picture of what Gorb is, while Gorb is just trying to discuss logical points.
It's like me saying you should stay out of this, because it's between myself and Amoc, since I directed my comment at him. That isn't the case, you're free to comment on whatever you like.
When it comes to the topic of the thread, I believe Relic will expand the breadth of content to a point where the game will live its usual DoW niche life, but it'll take time. People talk about DC like it was the first iteration of DOW 1, or like Retribution was the first iteration of DoW 2. Those games took time and TLC to nurture into what they are today, and so much time has passed since then that most people are entirely different people now than they were then, in an entirely new gaming industry from the days of DoW 1's release.
If Relic tries to focus solely on micro-wins with skins, a few maps, and simple balance tweaks, then I'll be concerned. However, they mentioned tinkering with the idea of increasing all line unit health by 20-25% and trying to rebalance the game from there, which would be an interesting direction that shows me they are actively looking to improve the experience.
@PrimaGoosa said:
This isn't a ring around two fighters. It's a discussion on a public forum thread.
So by that logic, it was perfectly reasonable for me to enter a debate Gorb was having on the side of the other poster, which is what Gorb originally took exception to and what spawned this whole ridiculous saga. Thanks for having my back, pal.
@PrimaGoosa said:
I never would have had the opportunity to respond if Amoc had actually taken the discussion to a PM instead of stringing it along and playing the "this makes me uncomfortable" victim angle. I see Amoc trying to paint an emotional picture of what Gorb is, while Gorb is just trying to discuss logical points.
The thing about "logic" is that it's more than just a word. You can't try to paint your arguments as "logical" and then come out with gems like the one I quoted above, or the ridiculous claim that I should have taken the discussion to PM which is what I asked Gorb to do in the first place. No, Gorb wanted to keep this public (for whatever reason), so if you have a problem with that you should really be telling him. Logic!
@PrimaGoosa said:
This isn't a ring around two fighters. It's a discussion on a public forum thread.
So by that logic, it was perfectly reasonable for me to enter a debate Gorb was having on the side of the other poster, which is what Gorb originally took exception to and what spawned this whole ridiculous saga. Thanks for having my back, pal.
Yeah, if you see a flaw in someone's logic in a discussion with someone else, I think you should call it out. Personally, I saw what you did as stepping in and trying to speak for someone else by arguing things like "that isn't what they meant", which is different, and potentially still reasonable. It just makes it a bit weird when you make entire arguments over things that someone in the argument caveated already as being OK if it was in fact the poster's true intent/meaning (as opposed to lining up precisely with the technical terminology).
@PrimaGoosa said:
I never would have had the opportunity to respond if Amoc had actually taken the discussion to a PM instead of stringing it along and playing the "this makes me uncomfortable" victim angle. I see Amoc trying to paint an emotional picture of what Gorb is, while Gorb is just trying to discuss logical points.
The thing about "logic" is that it's more than just a word. You can't try to paint your arguments as "logical" and then come out with gems like the one I quoted above, or the ridiculous claim that I should have taken the discussion to PM which is what I asked Gorb to do in the first place. No, Gorb wanted to keep this public (for whatever reason), so if you have a problem with that you should really be telling him. Logic!
The victim card makes me legitimately angry, especially in completely innocuous discussions like any of the ones we are having on this forum, and especially when there is no logical indication that oppression or victimization is occurring. Hell, Gorb apologized, and you just didn't accept his apology.
And is it so ridiculous for you to take the initiative and responsibility for your own comfort?
I didn't say all of my arguments were logical. Sometimes I give my impressions on things, which is what I'm doing now. I do try to be diligent about phrasing things like "I see X" or "This is like Y", instead of directly applying labels. I failed in that when I specifically said you were playing a particular angle, because that presumes knowledge of what your intentions/motivations are, which I have no idea. I do find it interesting how strongly you react to your own style of discussion, though.
@PrimaGoosa said:
Yeah, if you see a flaw in someone's logic in a discussion with someone else, I think you should call it out.
Yes. You're making it particularly easy.
@PrimaGoosa said:
The victim card makes me legitimately angry, especially in completely innocuous discussions like any of the ones we are having on this forum, and especially when there is no logical indication that oppression or victimization is occurring. Hell, Gorb apologized, and you just didn't accept his apology.
Legitimately angry? You were just berating me for an emotionally charged argument. Gather your thoughts, man. As for the "victim card", Gorb opened with that. I was apparently "meta-policing" his posts. Poor fella.
@PrimaGoosa said:
I didn't say all of my arguments were logical.
They're very much not. At least you understand that. As for "reacting to my own style of discussion," that's pretty juvenile/schoolyard reasoning. It's also funny how you keep trying to project strong reactions and emotions on me. You're the one who's "legitimately angry", right?
Oh brave new world, the things people get up from bed to do. Sometimes I frustrate myself, thinking what if the conversation had moved on. I really must get smarter and stop checking out this thread.
@Mervinas said:
Seriously, guys, just throw that TROLL (Amoc) out and continue on topic or lock this heresy redacted thread.
As much as his style of discussion might align with someone who appears to be intentionally antagonistic, there's no way to tell if his style just runs perpendicular to mine to cause repeated issue, or if he is just playing a role to get a rise out of people.
Until proven otherwise, you have to assume someone is being legitimate. If you're concerned about trolling, you can just walk away, no problem. I personally think Amoc and I just see the world differently.
@Mervinas said:
Seriously, guys, just throw that TROLL (Amoc) out and continue on topic or lock this heresy redacted thread.
Mervina again with her dictatorial posts. Its not easy to deal with hysteria : )
Instead of dragging the hate further through the thread, just use the tools at your disposal beneath each post and flag ones that you feel break the forum rules for conduct. No sense in blowing it up further, or drawing more attention to it.
Gorb, I believe that your characteristic patience and understanding toward human beings may be going to your detriment this time around. So unless you are on purpose trying to bury this topic into the deepest of embarrassments in an effort to try and find and excuse to lock it, please divert this little feud between you two to PM through the divine force that administration tools should grant you, and let the thread get on rails again.
@Fernandito said:
Gorb, I believe that your characteristic patience and understanding toward human beings may be going to your detriment this time around. So unless you are on purpose trying to bury this topic into the deepest of embarrassments in an effort to try and find and excuse to lock it, please divert this little feud between you two to PM through the divine force that administration tools should grant you, and let the thread get on rails again.
Gorb bowed out of having said argument 14 posts ago. If anything, you should be blaming me for taking issue with how some of the arguments were structured against him within said tiny feud. That's my fault.
I did, however, try to shoehorn my own thoughts on DoW 3's future into one of my posts above, but it was a bit of a non-sequitur. If you or anyone else wants to challenge any of those points, here they are again:
When it comes to the topic of the thread, I believe Relic will expand the breadth of content to a point where the game will live its usual DoW niche life, but it'll take time. People talk about DC like it was the first iteration of DOW 1, or like Retribution was the first iteration of DoW 2. Those games took time and TLC to nurture into what they are today, and so much time has passed since then that most people are entirely different people now than they were then, in an entirely new gaming industry from the days of DoW 1's release.
If Relic tries to focus solely on micro-wins with skins, a few maps, and simple balance tweaks, then I'll be concerned. However, they mentioned tinkering with the idea of increasing all line unit health by 20-25% and trying to rebalance the game from there, which would be an interesting direction that shows me they are actively looking to improve the experience.
Yes, I do believe in DoW3's future (which is inevitably a poorly balanced free to play RTS-lite model with pay-to-win dlc special units in a final attempt to sell it to MOBA players before it gets shut down completely in 2018).
Do you really think you are qualified to judge DOW I like you do? You aren't speaking from your personal experience, and you should realize there are many people who've been introduced in series with DOW I.
You make a good point and I'm sure there are many longterm fans of the DoW series or even genuine DoW1 players that don't like DoW3. I just notice a lot of the same ridiculous arguments from a lot of people - you know the moba, cartoon, backflip etc. etc. These are all coming from a source, and I don't think it is the typical DoW RTS fan from 2004. I cannot believe that somebody that is an actual RTS fan could make such arguments. There's a nasty element somewhere which means that it has become not only acceptable but almost the norm to trash this game at every opportunity.
You should buy DOw1 on Steam its cheap. Maybe get everything up to Dark Crusade. Wit will put a whole different interpretation of the later DOW games and why everyone is bitching about this latest one.
Do you really think you are qualified to judge DOW I like you do? You aren't speaking from your personal experience, and you should realize there are many people who've been introduced in series with DOW I.
You make a good point and I'm sure there are many longterm fans of the DoW series or even genuine DoW1 players that don't like DoW3. I just notice a lot of the same ridiculous arguments from a lot of people - you know the moba, cartoon, backflip etc. etc. These are all coming from a source, and I don't think it is the typical DoW RTS fan from 2004. I cannot believe that somebody that is an actual RTS fan could make such arguments. There's a nasty element somewhere which means that it has become not only acceptable but almost the norm to trash this game at every opportunity.
You should buy DOw1 on Steam its cheap. Maybe get everything up to Dark Crusade. Wit will put a whole different interpretation of the later DOW games and why everyone is bitching about this latest one.
Well I own both DOW1 and DOW2, both with all expansion, but I own DOW3 as well. And I don't regret that. Of course it is dead game now, but as you all know, I prefer vs AI, so don't care about it.
Overall, I'm owning all of three Dawn of Wars, and I don't regret that I bought Dow3, even if it is in fact the weakest of the franchise. I'm enjoying it just like the previous two. Heh I enjoying playing any RTS that I found it interesting, regardless if it is mediocre and dead or not.
@Chriskovo said:
You should buy DOw1 on Steam its cheap. Maybe get everything up to Dark Crusade. Wit will put a whole different interpretation of the later DOW games and why everyone is bitching about this latest one.
Yeah I have all the DoW1s. I just didn't play them in multiplayer. When I was playing DoW1 I lived in Germany and couldn't get English audio, also that was before matchmaking on steam (does it have that now?). Also it didn't run in 1080p. So I played campaign a bit and some skirmishes but that's about it. Maybe about 50 hours across them all. I think it is excellent but then again I think DoW2 and 3 are excellent too. If I had to be pushed I'd say DoW2 was my favourite.
Menu
Comments
Fernandito
Guys seriously could you please take that to PM and resume on topic
AtlasDoomOcculta
Hmmm, considering the F2P model is part and parcel of MOBAs(*), I reckon a good part of the community would have the proverbial stroke. Personally I'm not sure it would work well for the community or the game. It could ramp up the population, sure, but that would also imply potential added infrastructure and customer service costs. And without changing some fundamental aspects about the game, like bringing in more stuff to do with skulls (more doctrines? more cosmetics?), as well as without putting in more things to unlock, I can't see the numbers staying high.
I'd like to see if they could sell the armies individually, like they did with CoH2. Start the split now, with 3 army packs (SM, Eldar and Ork), and then put cosmetic DLC around that. And let those modular sales bring in the funds to release additional armies and cosmetics. Make it mimic more the tabletop/collector's experience. Definitely throw in free camera zoom and sync. kills (at least for a singleplayer or non-ranked mode). Make the most out of the fact 40K has a lot going for it in the looks.
*And before someone comes out brandishing a burning pitchfork, yes, the F2P model is present on other genres (MMOs, shooters, etc). My point is that there isn't a successful MOBA that's not F2P as well. Putting in F2P on DoW3 would certainly reduce the list of reasons why it isn't a MOBA, even if it does have some elements of it.
StarSauron
DOW3 doesn't even have a cool gaming mode that everybody can enjoy.
As free2play mod, it should be a faction you don't have now, Like Necrons or Chaos.
PrimaGoosa
This isn't a ring around two fighters. It's a discussion on a public forum thread. I never would have had the opportunity to respond if Amoc had actually taken the discussion to a PM instead of stringing it along and playing the "this makes me uncomfortable" victim angle. I see Amoc trying to paint an emotional picture of what Gorb is, while Gorb is just trying to discuss logical points.
It's like me saying you should stay out of this, because it's between myself and Amoc, since I directed my comment at him. That isn't the case, you're free to comment on whatever you like.
When it comes to the topic of the thread, I believe Relic will expand the breadth of content to a point where the game will live its usual DoW niche life, but it'll take time. People talk about DC like it was the first iteration of DOW 1, or like Retribution was the first iteration of DoW 2. Those games took time and TLC to nurture into what they are today, and so much time has passed since then that most people are entirely different people now than they were then, in an entirely new gaming industry from the days of DoW 1's release.
If Relic tries to focus solely on micro-wins with skins, a few maps, and simple balance tweaks, then I'll be concerned. However, they mentioned tinkering with the idea of increasing all line unit health by 20-25% and trying to rebalance the game from there, which would be an interesting direction that shows me they are actively looking to improve the experience.
So I'm not concerned yet.
Amoc
So by that logic, it was perfectly reasonable for me to enter a debate Gorb was having on the side of the other poster, which is what Gorb originally took exception to and what spawned this whole ridiculous saga. Thanks for having my back, pal.
The thing about "logic" is that it's more than just a word. You can't try to paint your arguments as "logical" and then come out with gems like the one I quoted above, or the ridiculous claim that I should have taken the discussion to PM which is what I asked Gorb to do in the first place. No, Gorb wanted to keep this public (for whatever reason), so if you have a problem with that you should really be telling him. Logic!
PrimaGoosa
Yeah, if you see a flaw in someone's logic in a discussion with someone else, I think you should call it out. Personally, I saw what you did as stepping in and trying to speak for someone else by arguing things like "that isn't what they meant", which is different, and potentially still reasonable. It just makes it a bit weird when you make entire arguments over things that someone in the argument caveated already as being OK if it was in fact the poster's true intent/meaning (as opposed to lining up precisely with the technical terminology).
The victim card makes me legitimately angry, especially in completely innocuous discussions like any of the ones we are having on this forum, and especially when there is no logical indication that oppression or victimization is occurring. Hell, Gorb apologized, and you just didn't accept his apology.
And is it so ridiculous for you to take the initiative and responsibility for your own comfort?
I didn't say all of my arguments were logical. Sometimes I give my impressions on things, which is what I'm doing now. I do try to be diligent about phrasing things like "I see X" or "This is like Y", instead of directly applying labels. I failed in that when I specifically said you were playing a particular angle, because that presumes knowledge of what your intentions/motivations are, which I have no idea. I do find it interesting how strongly you react to your own style of discussion, though.
Amoc
Yes. You're making it particularly easy.
Legitimately angry? You were just berating me for an emotionally charged argument. Gather your thoughts, man. As for the "victim card", Gorb opened with that. I was apparently "meta-policing" his posts. Poor fella.
They're very much not. At least you understand that. As for "reacting to my own style of discussion," that's pretty juvenile/schoolyard reasoning. It's also funny how you keep trying to project strong reactions and emotions on me. You're the one who's "legitimately angry", right?
AtlasDoomOcculta
Oh brave new world, the things people get up from bed to do. Sometimes I frustrate myself, thinking what if the conversation had moved on. I really must get smarter and stop checking out this thread.
Bad atlasdoomocculta, bad.
I'm out. Have fun guys!
Mervinas
Seriously, guys, just throw that TROLL (Amoc) out and continue on topic or lock this heresy redacted thread.
PrimaGoosa
As much as his style of discussion might align with someone who appears to be intentionally antagonistic, there's no way to tell if his style just runs perpendicular to mine to cause repeated issue, or if he is just playing a role to get a rise out of people.
Until proven otherwise, you have to assume someone is being legitimate. If you're concerned about trolling, you can just walk away, no problem. I personally think Amoc and I just see the world differently.
Strangequark
Instead of dragging the hate further through the thread, just use the tools at your disposal beneath each post and flag ones that you feel break the forum rules for conduct. No sense in blowing it up further, or drawing more attention to it.
Fernandito
Gorb, I believe that your characteristic patience and understanding toward human beings may be going to your detriment this time around. So unless you are on purpose trying to bury this topic into the deepest of embarrassments in an effort to try and find and excuse to lock it, please divert this little feud between you two to PM through the divine force that administration tools should grant you, and let the thread get on rails again.
PrimaGoosa
Gorb bowed out of having said argument 14 posts ago. If anything, you should be blaming me for taking issue with how some of the arguments were structured against him within said tiny feud. That's my fault.
I did, however, try to shoehorn my own thoughts on DoW 3's future into one of my posts above, but it was a bit of a non-sequitur. If you or anyone else wants to challenge any of those points, here they are again:
appiah4
Yes, I do believe in DoW3's future (which is inevitably a poorly balanced free to play RTS-lite model with pay-to-win dlc special units in a final attempt to sell it to MOBA players before it gets shut down completely in 2018).
Amoc
You could have just said no...
Chriskovo
You should buy DOw1 on Steam its cheap. Maybe get everything up to Dark Crusade. Wit will put a whole different interpretation of the later DOW games and why everyone is bitching about this latest one.
Draconix
Well I own both DOW1 and DOW2, both with all expansion, but I own DOW3 as well. And I don't regret that. Of course it is dead game now, but as you all know, I prefer vs AI, so don't care about it.
Overall, I'm owning all of three Dawn of Wars, and I don't regret that I bought Dow3, even if it is in fact the weakest of the franchise. I'm enjoying it just like the previous two. Heh I enjoying playing any RTS that I found it interesting, regardless if it is mediocre and dead or not.
Brichals
Yeah I have all the DoW1s. I just didn't play them in multiplayer. When I was playing DoW1 I lived in Germany and couldn't get English audio, also that was before matchmaking on steam (does it have that now?). Also it didn't run in 1080p. So I played campaign a bit and some skirmishes but that's about it. Maybe about 50 hours across them all. I think it is excellent but then again I think DoW2 and 3 are excellent too. If I had to be pushed I'd say DoW2 was my favourite.