Trishin wrote:We are used to getting complains about how bad things are 24/7, we listen to them. However we know in our heart and mind which one are legit and which are simply the bandwagon talking.

This is a dangerous line of reasoning. I'm not trying to be a ******, but you can't know anything in your heart. When people say things like that what they really mean is "personal bias."

Case in point:

Blue wrote:Wrong. The ramp up in population was with introduction of OF. The falloff because its not complete.

The ramp up occurred because of the hype of OF. The falloff occurred because falloff is the inevitable conclusion of hype.

Exactly what part of OF is not complete? The zones are implemented. The keeps are implemented. The port system is implemented. OF as an RvR zone has been finished on this server since you implemented it. Veteran players have written entire essays explaining why it is a failure. The pro-OF mafia has no rational response except to ask for more custom fixes to plug the holes in this sinking ship.

If OF is so great then why can't it stand on its own?

as if there are any valid arguments from the pro NF yakuza that make any sense

any points from the pro OF people just makes no sense to you as your arguments make no sense to me for example... arguing will not change anything about it.

and OF is still far from implemented completly... the relic system (extra guards for each keep) for example is a big part of it and not implemented yet.

holsten-knight wrote:as if there are any valid arguments from the pro NF yakuza that make any sense

any points from the pro OF people just makes no sense to you as your arguments make no sense to me for example... arguing will not change anything about it.

and OF is still far from implemented completly... the relic system (extra guards for each keep) for example is a big part of it and not implemented yet.

Seriously, what is it about OF that makes RVR 'better' ? Am seriously asking. NF proponents have given plenty of examples (e.g. keeps), but I have yet to hear any well-argued point from OF supporters. I am honest-to-god not trolling, but genuinely interested in hearing your arguments... because I personally see nothing in OF that wasn't done better in NF.

Lasastard wrote:Seriously, what is it about NF that makes RVR 'better' ? Am seriously asking. OF proponents have given plenty of examples (e.g. Emain advantage for small pop servers), but I have yet to hear any well-argued point from NF supporters. I am honest-to-god not trolling, but genuinely interested in hearing your arguments... because I personally see nothing in NF that wasn't done better in OF.

changed your statement to suit my pov

well anyway, NF is way to big for a serverpop below 1500peeps all you have is stalthers camping the bridges of dc, beno and bleed, while the none 8vs8 comunity is hoping someone is establishing a porterkeep in a foreign rvr zone to have some fun at all, cause the 8vs8 com is stumoping them into the ground on agra.
keeps in NF are crap especially the last update made them undefendable if you do not have equal numbers than the attacker.
porting the biggest crap ever - literally none is grouping(beside setgroups) everybody is wiping at the bridge next to his porterkeep and logs of ****** because stealther are so uber... those few who do group have no comparable enemies setgrps on agra and a possible random grp is raiding a tower next to nowhere wiping at keep guards without any inc.

you wont find any conclusion about OF-NF everybody has his own POV but this server allways was ment to be a classic revival and with classic OF is allways connected if you like it or don´t you have choosen to play on a server emulating classic as close as possible and nothing else is what you get wit OF...

Lasastard wrote:

holsten-knight wrote:as if there are any valid arguments from the pro NF yakuza that make any sense

any points from the pro OF people just makes no sense to you as your arguments make no sense to me for example... arguing will not change anything about it.

and OF is still far from implemented completly... the relic system (extra guards for each keep) for example is a big part of it and not implemented yet.

Seriously, what is it about OF that makes RVR 'better' ? Am seriously asking. NF proponents have given plenty of examples (e.g. keeps), but I have yet to hear any well-argued point from OF supporters. I am honest-to-god not trolling, but genuinely interested in hearing your arguments... because I personally see nothing in OF that wasn't done better in NF.

NF has it's pros and cons, like OF. I don't know how NF was implemented in the end, but if I watch some old Uthgard vids I see the old bridge design, which are just a total blackout by Mythic. Can't see why small men (what I care about) would be better with NF, since on live small men boils down to coast guarding / bridge camping and that's even worse than roaming in emain

i postet my pro OF arguments in like 1 million threads (mostly in german forums i guess)... so here just my 2 main arguments:

contra NF: its just about agramon (cause all other zones are too big), and agramon is lagging as hell due to the (not even visible) water underneath. epic fail by mythic, but thats the way it is.

pro OF: OF has the potential to give all people theyr favorite way of rvr.
There are 3 main rvr zones (hadrians wall, odins gate and emain), all three have meeting points (walls) and are not too big. One could be for solo/small grp rvr, one for 8v8 and one for zerg.
This is not used by the community yet, thats not a flaw of OF but of the uthgard community.
It took years for the communitys on live servers and not even all accomplished it, but on some it worked quite well with this split. And this is impossible in NF.

holsten-knight wrote:i postet my pro OF arguments in like 1 million threads (mostly in german forums i guess)... so here just my 2 main arguments:

contra NF: its just about agramon (cause all other zones are too big), and agramon is lagging as hell due to the (not even visible) water underneath. epic fail by mythic, but thats the way it is.

pro OF: OF has the potential to give all people theyr favorite way of rvr.
There are 3 main rvr zones (hadrians wall, odins gate and emain), all three have meeting points (walls) and are not too big. One could be for solo/small grp rvr, one for 8v8 and one for zerg.
This is not used by the community yet, thats not a flaw of OF but of the uthgard community.
It took years for the communitys on live servers and not even all accomplished it, but on some it worked quite well with this split. And this is impossible in NF.

On live there is an 8v8 zone, Agramon(and it doesnt lag more or less then other zones), and mainland zones are for smallmans/solos/keeptake stuff.

OF has a bunch of downsides. a brief summary in order of importance:
-The road DL -> emain is boring and way too long (takes way too long to find action)
-Annoying long ports (takes way too long to find action)
- AMG and MMG
- Emain landscape is sub-par. Way too many hills.
- keeps: its way more fun to capture an NF keep

I guess it ahs been said over and over again but hey

The only reason why you actually want OF is because of pure nostalgia reasons(and it really gets dull after a while because you realise OF wasnt all that great.) and because it fits the style of this server but come on, the pros far outweigh the cons.

Like I said in other threads, stop pretending OF is better for rational reasons. It's better in the sense that it feeds people's nostalgia but that's really it. Like seriously, Agramon is too laggy?

Like 1 or 2 month after mythic released NF the population went down and they had to cluster servers because NF is just too huge a rvr area and considering uthgard has a much lower rvr population than live servers even have now its just stupid to even suggest going back to NF.

If you cant see that, well then you are stupid as well.

It went down with the release of WoW almost simultaneously with NF. In fact it extended the lifespan of DAoC by years. If your beloved OF was untouched the game wouldn't have lived untill 2011. Yeah ofcourse the population has been declining for years, the game is 9/10 years old.

And they way it was on Uthgard it was never too big. We went from Emain to Agra + 3 keeps to Agra + 6 keeps. It was flexible and dynamic as it was all connected. OF with its porting and lack of warmap is slow and rigid.

With old ra's you have 3 major zones for rvr, emain hadrians odins...

stop trying to convince your self that people are running around in Snowdonia or Yggdrasil..etc.. looking for fights.

its way easier now to find a fight compared to as it was before.

Like I said in other threads, stop pretending OF is better for rational reasons. It's better in the sense that it feeds people's nostalgia but that's really it. Like seriously, Agramon is too laggy?

agramon was laggy for a long time after release of NF on live (dunno how it is today) and was here... good thing i played here with agramon to remember it.

the normal landscape in NF is cruel, i never got used to it.
Agramon is like emain in OF, the hot spot. Everything happens in agramon, the normal frontiers are just a waste of huge ugly landscape.

I never read a valid argument for NF, its all nonsense to me...

you see where we are getting with this? nowhere.

Oswaldo wrote:With old ra's you have 3 major zones for rvr, emain hadrians odins...

stop trying to convince your self that people are running around in Snowdonia or Yggdrasil..etc.. looking for fights.

its way easier now to find a fight compared to as it was before.

I suppose you meant 'old FZ', not 'old ras'
Also, we can already see how people are using these three zones for RvR ...not. Without warmap and with the lousy keeps, there is little point in going anywhere other than the Hib FZ right now. In NF you had the warmap to see which keeps/towers were under siege and you could get there without the tedious teleport system that you have to use in OF.

holsten-knight wrote:

Like I said in other threads, stop pretending OF is better for rational reasons. It's better in the sense that it feeds people's nostalgia but that's really it. Like seriously, Agramon is too laggy?

agramon was laggy for a long time after release of NF on live (dunno how it is today) and was here... good thing i played here with agramon to remember it.

the normal landscape in NF is cruel, i never got used to it.
Agramon is like emain in OF, the hot spot. Everything happens in agramon, the normal frontiers are just a waste of huge ugly landscape.

I never read a valid argument for NF, its all nonsense to me...

you see where we are getting with this? nowhere.

Because you are looking at this from the perspective of a setgroup player - and for setgroup players it really doesn't matter either way - NF, OF, as long as there is a sufficiently large space to get your 8vs8 on (which btw I prefer as a playstyle myself, but I do acknowledge that there are more ways to enjoy the RvR-part of the game). And I maintain that NF had more to offer there (such as the keeps).

All what I see are the same persons bashing OF again and again. If you want NF that hard play live servers and have fun with it. We see some problems with OF and they won't be solved with NF and on top of it NF introduces new problems. I'm also of the opinion that live like NF doesn't fit a small population at all.

Respect the fact that unmodified bugfree OF is superior to unmodified bugfree NF and that it works out better under low population circumstances. Other comparisons are not valid.

I'm out of these discussions for now as this will run circles over and over.