More Warhammer details unveiled

I was going to write about other stuff but Arthur Parker linked an interesting 7-min video (you need to copy and paste in a new browser window to make it work) that reveals some of the aspects I was trying to examine:

This image should represent the zone distribution in the game for one of the three "war fronts": Greenskin Vs Dwarf.

I wonder if the numbers represent the four "tiers" of the levelling system.

In this case there are two interesting observations. The first is that the zones are level capped as I guessed. The second is that the capital cities are EXCLUSIVELY PvP zones. Just like an end-game PvP raid zone (DAoC's relic raids) that you can access only when the battle front moves there. So no social "hubs" like in WoW, they are just used for PvP.

If you count all the circles they are 11. So confirming the number of zones for each "war front" (33 zones in the full game). But at the same time we know that the starting zone for dwarves and greenskin is shared, with two opposite entry points and a seamless PvP zone in the middle.

Instead in that scheme the dwarves zone and greenskin zone look separated. So I wonder if they count it two times, like splitted in two in that graph, but seamlessly connected in the actual game.

In this case the unique, accessible zones by one character per warfront would be four (plus the two capitals). Which is GOOD, imho. Since it would help to make the PvP activity converge. Like a consolidated version of the DAoC's frontiers (if they don't overdo with the instances).

I wish we could have some confirmations.

Add warmachines and divided the assault to the capitals into five-six different "stages" with each its own objective (think to Wolfenstein: Enemy Territory) and it could be the coolest thing EVER.

--
And more, truly interesting (but unconfirmed) details:

No levels.

Four tiers, with ranks within each tier. You'll have 4 XP bars that allow you to select "packages" of advancements - abilities, static buffs, skills, etc. that you want to work on. Three will be "standard" bars, one will be RvR-specific.

The packages allow you to select advancements that interest you without level-locking them. So, if you're a big fan of exploring and you want to get a mount earlier than - say - an improved combat ability, you can choose a package that includes the ability to use a mount. Packages will have SOME restrictions - most likely tier-specific - but they offer players the ability to wind up with all of the stuff they want eventually, but also the ability to get it in the order of their choosing.

--
no pure "support" classes. In addition, no rogues or stealth classes. Not fond of hybrid classes either, though there will almost certainly be SOME degree of hyrbidization for some races.

--
EVERY CLASS - is a combat class, you won't find yourself ineffective simply because your group lacks total diversity.

Regarding differentiation, there are a number of things to consider:

1) In terms of simple aesthetics, customization will play a large role. Armor dying and trophies, primarily, will allow players to be visually unique without breaking the aforementioned "iconic look, iconic role" rule. When I say trophies, I mean things like orcs wearing belts of dwarf beards and the skulls of fallen opponents impaled on the spikes of their armor.

2) In terms of personal advancement, you have the package system. I explained this earlier, but it basically lets you play the class you want to play and advance in exactly the way that appeals to you, in exactly the order you want to do it.

3) And in terms of combat, you have tactics. This system is a strategic layer of combat where players choose from a pool of available "tactics" before combat that they are then locked into for a set period of time (minutes or hours, not days). Tactics can be things like persistant buffs, race or mob-specific attack bonuses, etc. As players advance, additional slots open up allowing players to use more - or more powerful tactics. Weak tactics are worth one point, the most powerful tactics are worth - say - five. So if you have ten slots open, you might choose ten minor tactics or two extremely powerful tactics or a mix of five of the former, one of the latter. Or any other mix in between.

This is designed to help players avoid being locked into a specific character spec in any significant way without giving them the ability to respec on the fly without any advanced thought. And, of course, to avoid the typical "I hit these three buttons and - SOMETIMES - this button over here too" style of play.

Let's examine this in order.

"No levels" IS GOOD. The four experience bars could mean that you select the skills you want to level up. Usually the skill systems are based on the use, the more you use one skill the more you improve in it. Here Mythic gives you "four slots", where you can put the skills you want to improve and then the experience points you get will be automatically distributed to those skills. So no more use-driven, which adds freedom and could be a very good design choice to streamline the game.

Now, it's not really a single pick for each skills, but a "package" that you can put on one of the four "experience slots". Here it's still hard to understand how the system works because there must be a link between the ranks and the "skill packages".

From the sound of it I could guess that the system could become highly selective. You obviously need to select those packages you want to use and those you'll leave behind. As a specialization system it looks close to how DAoC currently works. For every level in DAoC you gain "x" specialization points that you allocate to your spec-lines. Here the mechanic is basically the same, but reverted. DAoC's spec lines = Warhammer's packages. You choose the spec-lines / packages you want to develop and then go out to "level them", which will also make you gain "ranks" (probably you gain one rank for every "x" skills you unlock in a package), with the direct consequence of not letting you develop all the packages, but forcing you to select only those that fit with your "build".

In DAoC: level up -> allocate
In Warhammer: allocate -> level up

Not so incredibly innovative ;p

The only difference could be that every new skills in the same package always "costs" you the same amount. While allocating every new point in a spec-line in DAoC costs you progressively more points. It would be an improvement if so.

The negatives of this system are all already known in DAoC. It becomes extremely hard to make choices for your character without third-party character builders that let you plan your character from the first level to the last. And without a respec system you could easily gimp your character forever. So it's a system that requires a very good knowledge of the game and that isn't easy on the newbies (accessibility issue). You cannot start to play and slowly learn the game, instead you need to have already everything pre-planned from the first minute so that your character doesn't finish to suck.

My suspect on the four "tiers" is that they will be used as a measure the overall power of the character, similar to how the levels are being used in Oblivion to then adapt the world around the player.

If this is true then all I said before about the level caps on the zones can still be valid. It would damage the PvP if Mythic allows a "tier four" character to go mess in a zone with characters at the first tier.

Considering everything together the "no level" claim is pretty weak. It's possible that gaining ranks doesn't scale up your stats, hitpoints and mana (at this point it would be the only real difference), but add a rank-based itemization and you basically have the exact same mechanic that drives DAoC or every other level-based game.

No support classes IS GOOD. Remove "healers" altogether, it can only be good.

No stealth classes IS GOOD. Removing annoying ambushes from campers is a good design choice for a game that focuses on a "war" where everyone is supposed to participate together.

About the "tactics" system, as I commented I fear it will lead to min-maxing and default builds. It sounds like WoW's talent system, just more manipulable. I don't see it having a particularly significant role in the design and the gameplay. In the sense that it doesn't seem to add much and being indispensable or worthwhile idea.

I need to know more. Some things are interesting and convincing, some other less.