PAX: Guild Wars 2 Overview Part 3: GW 2 PvP Thus Far

Last, but not least the PEE VEE PEE!  At least the small amount that was at PAX.  Sadly we have little to no new information about WvWvW, something I'm presonally very eager to find out more about.  I did take pictures of the PvP matches at PAX, but alas they were awful so I won't be displaying them here.

Collision

I was going to save this topic for last, but what the heck, let's save the best for first instead.  Prior to going to PAX, I had found a couple articles that had quoted a few Arenanet team members stating there was no collision currently in the game.  Going to PAX, I completely expected the game to be devoid of collision.  But to my surprise and fancy...there WAS collision!  Hooray!

Now for those of us that have played PvP games where collision was included in the game (DAOC, Warhammer, World of Tanks, etc), we know that collision gives that added level of strategy and thinking.  Unfortunately, having collision tends to increase the amount of data needed to be shot back and forth between the player and the game's servers.  Extrapolate this to 100's of players in a large zone and you end up with lag typically.  Warhammer had both friendly AND enemy collision and as a result (and for numerous other reasons) they had some fairly laggy battles at the forts.  They attempted to take out friendly collision but the players screamed bloody murder even though it would have helped Warhammer's lag issues somewhat. 

Fast forward to Guild Wars 2 and a few months ago the game, indeed, had no collision whatsoever.  What Arenanet found, though, is that players in PvE and PvP would attack their opponent, walk inside of them, their opponent would swing but miss because their enemy was now occupying the same space as they did, and so on and so forth.  In other words, players were using the lack of collision AGAINST the game mechanics to avoid damage.  Smart play, but not what the developers wanted.  Thus enemy collision was added.

I tested this thoroughly during my PvE playthrough and had other PAX players try it as well.  We all came to the same conclusions:
#1 There is collision with the enemy npc/monster only if you have them targeted.
#2 You cannot walk through the enemy; the game will make you go to either side of them if you try.
#3 Sometimes you can walk backwards through an enemy if they're targeted (might be a bug however).
#4 You can walk through all friendlies.
#5 You can walk through enemies if they're not targeted.

I also watched the PvP matches to check if the above also rang true, and I can safely say, for the most part, it looked like all the above rules applied.  There were only a few times that I thought I saw two opposing players go through each other.  Otherwise they couldn't.  I imagine that both PvE and PvP collision mechanics are the same code and therefore should act exactly the same.

We'll see if general enemy collision is ever added, but I imagine friendly collision is probably just not in the plan.  General enemy collision would help us use advanced tactics at keep and castle defenses, but I don't see how friendly collision would be a deal breaker if it wasn't in.  After going through Warhammer's issues with numbers of players on the screen at the same time, I'd be fine if Arenanet left friendly collision out so that we all would experience less lag.

Focus Firing

I discussed this briefly in Part 2, but I'll go more in depth.  While watching the PvP matches, more often than not, a solo player would find himself/herself against 2 or more other players.  I actually clocked how long it took to kill the solo player.  The average time was typically around 5 seconds with the shortest being 3 seconds and the longest being infinity; there were quite a few times the solo player got away or used obstructions to block spells until the solo'er got backup.  Not once did I ever see a player get 1 or 2 shot.  Big relief for me.  The biggest worry I had with the lack of a trinity is that the fighting would be too fast paced-that everyone could 1 or 2 shot each other.  It's simply not the case.  While it might take a player of extraordinary skill to beat other players when outnumbered, anyone can stay alive for an reasonable amount of time, at least slowing the opposing side down.  Therefore during structured PvP where you have 5 players a side, it is a completely reasonable tactic to have 1 player guard a point.

Dodge and other utility skills

For the most part, everyone was just trying to figure out how to use most of these abilities, but dodge did work very well when used appropriately.  Players very quickly, however, got the hang of their elite skills.  I can't tell you how many times someone used lich form or tornado.  One criticism I did have was that a lot of players really didn't take advantage of their team's guardian bubbles or line of wardings.  Only once did I see a team correctly use a line of warding (and to great effect).  Otherwise all the players including even the guardians themselves would walk right past the protective bubble, instead of staying inside and either healing or using offensive range spells/abilities.

AoE vs Single Target Dps

To put it simply, no where in Structured PvP did I see where one was overpowered or overused.  AoE, of course, worked best against larger groups and single target dps worked best against, you guessed it, single targets.  Not a big surprise here, but it is refreshing not to see to big imbalances yet in GW2 in spite of it only being in the alpha testing phase.  I can only imagine AoE will become a more important part of WvWvW, but time will tell.  If they make AoE damage spells work like AoE healing spells (increase duration, not damage), then single target dps might actually be more important.  It really remains to be seen.

"Cowboy" Classes

From PAX, the two effective "cowboy" classes, ie loners, seemed be primarily be thieves and elementalists.  Sure Necromancers were great at taking damage, but if something needed to be quick n' dead and allow the player to be able to heal, the player was usually playing a thief or a elementalist.  Elementalists really did well because of their water element and the extra heals granted from that.  Thieves tended to do well because of stealth and their pulling ability, singling out single players at a time.  Granted all classes can effectively solo.  Now don't assume that I'm saying only thieves and elementalists can fight effectively solo; the other classes just tended to play much more effectively in groups of 2 or 3. 


Destructible Environment and Cover

It was pretty neat to see destructible environments in PvP.  Only PvP mmo game I know of that that has destructible objects littered about is World of Tanks.  If Arenanet extends this feature to WvWvW and not just to doors, but walls....well let's just say I'll have to buy myself a drool bucket.  Now all that I saw that was destructible in the Battle of Khylo were the windows in the clocktower, clocktower roof, the wagon by the windmill (if I remember right), and of course the trebuchets.  There may have been more, but without more time to watch and play the map, I didn't find them.  The windows were fairly easy to break, but the wagon, which could be used as cover from ranged attacks, took a few good hits before it was destroyed providing a temporary place to take refuge behind.

Overall the more effective teams and players took extensive use of both destructible objects and of cover.  If better team saw a number's advantage, they'd push into the other team.  If they didn't, they'd typically use cover (temporary and permanent) to slowly tear the other team down and/or bait their enemies into making poor decisions.  It was quite pleasant to see this aspect of the game in action.


That's it.  That wraps up my PAX adventure this last weekend in Seattle.  Keep in mind all of what I have wrote is subject to change since Arenanet has just started on some of these game features, but from what I saw, it should prove to be a very fun game.

Cheers.

PAX: Guild Wars 2 Overview Part 2: Random GW2 Q&A

In this second installment, I am going to be going over a collection of questions sent to me by fellow players and the answers I found at PAX (or in the case of some, didn't find).  Some of them I'll be going more in depth during "Part 3: GW 2 PvP Thus Far" which I should have written in the next couple days.  Without further ado, let's get started.

1.  Does each norn animal form give a special benefit?  For example, does the snow leopard form give a stealth ability?

I've always wondered about this, and initially it was one of the reasons I wanted to play a Norn.  Unfortunately there's still no more information about racial skills yet.  The best information at PAX I could get my hands on about this is during the opening Norn playthroughs where I got a chance to be changed into one of each of the four forms by various shaman.  I got myself changed into a snow panther. Much to my dismay, but confirming old reports, the skill set of the snow panther didn't include any type of stealth abilities.  In fact, I only had access to fighting skills; no utility skills were available while in this animal form.  The good news is movement speed did seem to increase.  So if one could extrapolate that these shaman induced forms turn out to be similar or the same as the actual Norn racial skills, you might have increased movement speed.  This may just keep my hopes up, but we'll see.  My main reason for wanting stealth as a Norn is to really have a good way to get away or sneak up on other players.  Movement speed wouldn't be quite as good, but it would be better than nothing. 

2.  Any idea when we might start seeing a big presentation about WvWvW like we're seeing with structured pvp now? 

I cornered a few Arenanet representatives about this one and for the most part, the answer I received was "I can't answer that."  I expected that response, but since the idea of WvWvW was so near and dear to my heart, I had to ask.  I did find out at least....

3.  Is WvWvW going to be available at launch? Or is there a possibility that it will be delayed?

"Yes, if we've announced something at this stage, it will be in the game."  Thank goodness.  I was getting a tiny bit worried since nothing has really been released except one leaked WvW map.  Overall, all the Arenanet team members seem very excited about WvW anyways so that's also reassuring.

4. How awesome is the character customization screen?

A W E S O M E.  It was a little bit unfortunate that the Norn playable PAX demo didn't have as fleshed out of a character creation as the other races, but I did get to watch another player take a good 15 minutes playing with the Human version.  It was incredible.  It was like the Oblivion creation screen on roids.  Almost anything you wanted to be able to tweak you could.  For the Norn, I had a choice of tattoos, beard styles, height, skin tone, and hair types.  The Human version had that (minus the tats) and you could tweak facial expression, eyebrow size/shape/color, nose shape/size/position and skin age among others.  I was definitely very impressed.  I'm looking forward to spending at least 1/2 hr on character creation once the game releases and I'm not even that crazy about that sort of thing.

5. If there is no body blocking, will there be some equivalent and what will that be?

There's some collision.  I'll explain what I mean by this and going more over this subject in my next blog post.  The good news is there's no complete lack thereof like I had read from a few Guild Wars 2 articles.  I personally confirmed some collision in the PvE demo (over and over).  It was pretty tough to tell for sure one way or the other during the PvP matches, but from what I saw, I'd say the mechanic in PvP is the same as in PvE.  It's something incredibly important to me and increases the strategies (and fun imo) in PvP.

6. What known pets will rangers be able to have? Do they have to go through a taming process? Will Great Danes be a pet?

"Any pets we've shown during videos will be available to play with in the game."  I couldn't get a firm answer on how you got your pet, but if GW is any indication, you'll probably have to tame the animal.  And the dog is available.  I was corrected by one of the reps that the dog that's been in a lot of the Ranger videos is technically a Blood Hound, but if you want, you can just pretend it's a Great Dane.

7. How exactly do the Hall of Monuments "heirloom" items work? Are they only good for the first few levels or will they level up like in WoW?

"We don't know yet.  How would you like it to work?" I was actually surprised that I was asked in return by one of the developers.  My reply was that it'd be nice to have the item level up as you go, but for it to always be inferior to other items you could get at your level along the way.  That way, there's incentive for crafters to make superior items and max/min'ers to get the best weapons for PvP/PvE.  Likewise those of us that worked hard enough to get these items, wouldn't have to constantly spend time/money upgrading our items.  Now we'll see if they actually take my advice to heart, but don't hate me or send a curse my way if this is how they do end up making the HoM items.  No matter what they end up doing, the dev reminded me, you could use a transmutation stone to keep the artwork for your higher level gear if you decided to do so.

8. When it comes to pvp and such how big a role is aoe going to be (compared to single target dps)?

The answer of this is really subjective and I'll talk about it more in my Part 3 post, but from what I saw, Arenanet did a good job of balancing out aoe damage versus single target dps.  If there were a lot of enemies in a specific spot, use aoe.  If you needed to focus a single player, single target dps.  Typical stuff and PvP tended to play out how I expected it to.

9. How susceptible are players to focus fire?

Focus fire does help, but you can't get one shot.  I saw multiple 3 on 1 instances were the single player lived at least 5 seconds if not longer.  The more the single player used dodge effectively and obstructions such as corners or obstacles, the longer they could survive against poor odds.  Much better than I expected. 

10. Do the utility skills provide enough of an escape for you to stay alive if applied well or it a big frag fest?

Yes, they do help you escape.  No, it was not a big frag fest.  Now I can't speak to what will happen in WvW, but utility skills did help each player when used in the right situations. 

11. Will the Gear/Loot rewards in WvWvW gameplay be as good as in PvE game play?

"We don't know yet..." but assume they will be since it's Arenanet.  It would be bad business not to. I am not particularly worried about this.

12. Do they plan to have more than 1 map to fight over in the WvWvW campaign? If so, will the maps be different on each Server/Neutral Zone in WvWvW and will they be shuffled when they reset the server match ups after each campaign?

Great question.  Really liked this one myself.  However... "We don't know yet" is all I could find out.

13. Will there be a benefits/rewards system for Guilds? Any hints on what these will be?

Yes.  I mentioned it in my Part 1 and it has been briefly discussed elsewhere.  As a player you can help your guild earn influence which in turn can be used in your guild tech tree.  What exactly this tech tree is or what guild abilities you can get are all still very much in development.  As in they're making them right now as I type this.

14. What is the size limit for guilds in Guild Wars 2?

They don't know yet.  They're still designing their guild system.  The Arenanet representatives did let us know we can have multiple characters in multiple guilds however. 

15. Are you able to release any new information (maps, videos, screenshots, etc) about WvWvW?

"No."  ./smile  No worries.  I had to ask.

That's Part 2 folks.  Short and sweet.  Stay tuned for "Part 3: GW 2 PvP Thus Far."

Comparing PvP mmo's using Sun Tzu's Art of War

Anyone studying warfare will inevitably run into a quote or theory from "Art of War" by Sun Tzu.  It's near impossible not to.  I have always been intrigued by history's battles and wars, and when I first read Sun Tzu's book, I couldn't have been more impressed.  Sun Tzu's teachings are surprising for two big reasons:
#1 The rules he laid out apply so well even today and probably forever will.
#2 His teachings are so thorough it's basically impossible to find any other single document that covers how to conduct war as effectively.  

Now this blog and the series of articles I will write over the next year or so will not be analyzing this or that historical battle, but rather how Sun Tzu's "Art of War" applies to a series of very warfare infused video games, more specifically PvP (Player vs Player) oriented mmo's.  Ultimately I hope to use his teachings to have more fun in World vs World (WvW) in Guild Wars 2 (GW 2), but for this first article, I will be analyzing and comparing three big video games and how well Sun Tzu's rules apply to each.  In the end, I think it will be come apparent that if you "Understand the Art of War's lessons and you will prevail. Ignore them and you fight in darkness."

Don't fight in darkness.


Most of us pvp'ers play PvP styled mmo's for the challenge of going against other players and beating them within a set of given rules.  Because of the human condition, most of us love to learn how to fight more effectively or how to outsmart our opponents.  However there are particular limitations to how well some PvP mmo's can intellectually challenge us.  Most games typically include at least a form of instanced pvp fighting such as World of Warcraft (WoW) with battlegrounds or Rift with Warfronts.  Others have objective based world pvp such as Dark Age of Camelot (DAOC).  Some have both like Warhammer Online (WAR) and possibly Guild Wars 2.  In most cases, instanced pvp fights act more like chess.  Typically the healer(s) was considered the "Queen" or "King" depending on your point of view, and every class had a specific and limited role.  In contrast, objective based pvp tends to be more like the Chinese game of Go where the emphasis is more on the holding of territory with the least amount of manpower.  That's not to say chess like situations don't occur in objective based pvp fights (ie if two small pvp groups attacked one another), the overall emphasis just isn't on small scale fighting.  I will say this though: having both types of pvp in one game increases the challenge and as a result, fun.  The instanced pvp helps train smaller groups to become the more "elite" and effective fighting force and therefore can hold objectives better, in some situations, than a big mob of players.  In this case, these "elite" players will often have to think and strategize on TWO levels: on the chess level (which favors attrition) AND on the Go level (which favors hitting weak spots and using Sun Tzu strategy).

But let's not get ahead of ourselves.  Let's narrow our focus.  I want to evaluate how current PvP mmo's handle Sun Tzu's rules of war.  I'll be comparing DAOC, WoW, and GW 2 (using what has been announced so far).  The amount of information in Sun Tzu's "Art of War" is staggering even though volume wise, it's a fairly small book.  I've narrowed down a few big rules and grouped them to use to compare the three games:

1. All warfare is deception.
Sun Tzu's famous overall thesis.  If Sun Tzu could write his book in one sentence it would be this.  In instanced pvp, there's some deception, but not a lot.  You're fairly limited to small scale feints.  Perhaps you could charge a large group towards one end of the instance and then split at the last second or if it's arena (ie WoW) have your healer out in the open as bait, but as in most cases you could do these types of deception in objective based pvp as well as have ambushes and more involved feints and deceptions.    In this case, GW 2 ~ DAOC > WoW. 

2. If instructions are not clear and commands not explicit, it is the commander's fault.  But if the orders are clear, it's the fault of the subordinate officers.
Forever true.  Whether it's PUG or a premade, arena or pvp instance, the leader has to be clear.  This applies to all levels of pvp.  Clarity of orders effects all types of pvp equally if the leader isn't succinct and clear with his orders, but there are tools to make giving orders easier.  The major tools players use to achieve this are voice communication softwares such as Ventrillo or Teamspeak.  WoW has a slight advantage as a game over DAOC and GW 2 since it has a built in audio chat system, but Ventrillo and Teamspeak are still used much more since they tend to be more user friendly.

3. It is essential for victory that generals are unconstrained by their leaders. 
This has no effect on whether you're playing GW 2 or WoW or DAOC, but has EVERYTHING to do with what guild you're in and what leader you have.

4. Know your enemy and know yourself and in 100 battles, you will never be in peril.
In most situations in all three games, it's really more important to know yourself, your players, and the tendencies of the PUG's within your group (if you have any).  However, WoW and DAOC actually trump GW 2 in this regard because there is NO rotation of enemies which means you can actually get to know your enemy.  There is rotation for arenas in WoW, but I'm fairly certain you'll face a rotation of teams in GW 2 arena fights as well.  Pre-Lich King WoW and DAOC had you pitted against rivals that you got to know and hate over time.  Real rivalries could spring up (and you could get to know your enemies' tendencies).  The one downside to rotating who you fight against in WvW for GW 2 is that your enemy never stays the same.  Though WvW rotation is superior in many ways to RvR in DAOC, in this one way, it is inferior.

5. To win 100 battles is not the height of skill-to subdue the enemy without fighting is.
I don't know of many instances where instance/arena fights end with one side never fighting, but I know of several times in DAOC or Warhammer where you could take a keep without ever fighting other players, especially if you feigned an attack somewhere else. 


6. Avoid what is strong.  Attack what is weak.
7. More important to outthink your enemy than outfight him.
8. To move your enemy, entice him with something he is certain to take.
9. In battle use a direct attack to engage and an indirect attack to win.
10. Make your enemy prepare on his left and he will be weak on his right.
11. Those skilled in war bring the enemy to the field of battle.  They aren't brought by him.
All of the above Sun Tzu teachings describe using your intellect to beat the enemy as well as using deception to make your enemy make mistakes in order for you to gain a objective more easily.  There are definitely times where this applies in small scale, instanced fights, but it's definitely much more applicable in objective based warfare such as in DAOC or GW 2.

12. Let your plans be as dark as night-then strike like a thunderbolt. 
I seem to remember a different translation of this rule that states "Make your plans formless until at the last moment," but in the end it's the same idea.  Again applies more to DAOC or GW 2 since it's really hard to ever have a form in instanced pvp or arena fights to begin with. 

13. The way a wise general can achieve greatness beyond ordinary is through foreknowledge.  (is also related to #4)
14. Use spies for every kind of business.
15. It is essential to seek out enemy agents who have come to spy against you and bribe them to serve you.
There's two main ideas to these 3 sets of rules.  Use spies to gain knowledge and the general with most knowledge tends to win in much bigger ways.  Now in all three games, you really don't get to use spies because it's consider cheating in most regards, but scouts are the next best thing in pvp fights.  It's still a toss up between all three games in this regard since you really should scout your situation whether or not you're fighting in an instance, arena, or objective based pvp.  

16. Put the army in the face of death where there is no escape, and they will not flee or be afraid-there is nothing they cannot achieve.
Nicknamed Death Ground by many philosophers, it really only applies in objective based pvp settings where you have a small group that has the odds stacked against it.  Instanced pvp and arena settings tend to have BOTH sides in Death Ground scenerios and so doesn't really apply.  

17.  When a falcon's strike breaks the body of its prey, it is because of timing.  When torrential water tosses boulders, it is because of momentum. 
This is basically stating that you want to maintain momentum.  Here's a very large difference between instanced/arena based pvp and objective based pvp.  With the instanced/arena pvp, the winning team has a very hard time keeping their momentum because each fight makes them start from square one AND the team they fight each time may ALSO have just gained positive momentum.  In contrast, if you gain positive momentum in objective based pvp, you tend to keep it and the loser tends to keep losing momentum as fighting goes on.  In the end this rule applies more to DAOC and GW 2.  

18. The winning army realizes the conditions for victory first, then fights-the losing army fights first then seeks victory.
Another big Sun Tzu teaching.  Applies to all types of pvp.  No big difference here.  


19. There are five fundamental factors for success in war: weather, terrain, leadership, military doctrine, and, most importantly, moral influence.
20. Must maintain will of the people.  
Of the subjects mentioned above, it would very progressive if a game had weather that affected battle, but I have yet to see that happen.  All the other subjects tend to be equally important in all types of pvp except for one. 

Will of the people (morale) and moral influence really only affect games that have entire sides of servers fighting each other.  WoW never really had server on server fights.  Vanilla WoW had some great fights at South Shore and Tarren Mill when the Honor System was first released but the effects of these battles didn't really have any affect on the morale of the Alliance or Horde.  Conversely, DAOC and GW 2 have entire realms fighting each other.  The morale or will of your people aka server matters greatly in these two games.

21. No nation has ever benefited from prolonged war.  
Really only applies to objective based pvp games, but it's more of a detriment.  The longer there's a stalemate in DAOC or GW 2 world based pvp, the more often players get bored.   In this case, WoW players would be affected the least, but in a positive way.

22. Move only when you see an advantage and there is something to gain.  Only fight if a position is critical.

Applies fairly equally in all three games.  


23. In war, numbers alone confer no advantage-Do not advance relying on sheer military power.
Since in instances/arenas numbers are always equal to start off with, this really only applies to objective based pvp games.  +1 for DAOC and GW 2.

24. When the enemy occupies high ground, do not confront him.  If he attacks downhill, do not oppose him.
Holding high ground gains some advantages in instance/arena fights, but not many.  This definitely applies much more to objective based games.  

25. There are some armies that should not be fought-some ground that should not be contested.  
Even though I'm sure all of us faced that "oh crap, not these guys" groups in instances or arenas, you still had to fight them.  It's only in objective based pvp where you can actually avoid them.  Win for DAOC and GW 2.

26. When troops flee, are insubordinate, collapse or are routed in battle, it is the fault of the general.
Applies equally to all three games.  


27. War is a matter of vital importance to the state-it is a matter of life and death, survival or ruin. 
This Sun Tzu rule doesn't really affect my arguement, but does have a profound effect on how developers should approach pvp games in the first place.  You could read "states" to mean servers or entire mmorpg games and "war" as pvp fighting.  Thus "translated," pvp is a matter of vital importance to the video game-it is a matter of the game's survival or the game's economic ruin.

It appears Sun Tzu approved of pvp in online games long before they were ever made.  :) Doom to developers and their games that ignore pvp.

Overall, it really wasn't a fair comparison to begin with, but as you can see Sun Tzu style warfare greatly favors objective based pvp in DAOC and GW 2.  For the comparison itself, with no regard to anything outside Sun Tzu's "Art of War," DAOC and GW 2 are fairly even.  There's a few things game wise that would probably tip things in GW 2's favor, but  the game isn't even in beta yet so who really knows if it will become DAOC's true spritual successor.  It does help you realize why DAOC is considered the best pvp game ever made-it requires a level of thinking and strategizing WoW never did.

I hope you enjoyed my video game run down using Sun Tzu's "Art of War" as a measuring stick.  If you wanted to learn anything, make sure to try to read and understand Sun Tzu's theories that I typed in bold text.  His ideas are quite impressive and could help you beat my guild in GW 2.  You can bet I'll be using them against you.  Yes, you.

Next up, Recruitment for Gaiscioch.   After that, I'll critique one of my own nights that I led in Warhammer using Sun Tzu's "Art of War."