VERY long and detailed interview with Miguel Caron

Edija

Im sure that its too early to talk about faction balance issues, if it really comes true that one faction is always too strong there will be fixes and patches (at least I hope so) so that the game isnt broken. Although I remember Miguel said that he isnt about balancing all sides which is fine by me!

Another things is the popularity that SM have, I guess there will be no problem with SM numbers ingame if the game accomplishes what is promised.

And you are forgetting the tyranids that are the AI balancing faction which the devs will use to stop faction steamrolls.

brentellison

Originally posted by Volkmar

I'm quite intrigued by that list of "Must play" games for Eternal Crusade devs and I would like to know the reasonings behind each title.

Space Marines is quite obvious, no need to explain  this one.

Mount & Blade Warband: While this is an awesome game and it does make nice battles, etc, it is heavily focused on melee/mounted fighting so it seems it would be of little value to a WH40k game, what of Warband should your devs focus on exactly?

Planetside 2: ok, another no brainer, no need to explain this one.

Borderlands: Interesting. this is a FPS with heavy co-operative elements, so I see the reasons here, but it has a quite different approach to thing, namely LOOT! From what I understood, there is no "loot" in Eternal Crusade, is that right? You gain requisition points with which you can unlock new equipment, but you do not find any on the battlefield, yes?

So what of Borderlands is of use here? just the co-operative elements or something else?

Cheers!

 

When it comes to all of these games, keep in mind that the real question for us is not "What can we take from this?" so much as "Why is this part of the game successful?" Understanding that lets us better develop mechanics that work best for our own game.

Mount & Blade Warband is a fully system-driven wargame where the player is an individual who explores the world and takes part in the actual battles. But there's also a great mod called Napoleonic Warfare. It's not for everyone (you have to reload for ~10 seconds between every shot), but the siege battles in it support up to 250+ players and the pacing and flow of these matches are unlike just about anything else out there - you really feel like a soldier in a war.

Borderlands is a prime example of a co-op game that groups of friends tend to cluster around that's also successfully married extensive RPG systems with full shooter mechanics.

If I were to add a fifth game to this list it'd be Dark Souls, but pretty much everyone says that these days!

brentellison

On the subject of balance (including anything involving the Orks), keep in mind that those systems still have a lot of iteration ahead of them! Expect plenty of updates in that regard as time goes on.

freakishbean

Originally posted by brentellison
On the subject of balance (including anything involving the Orks), keep in mind that those systems still have a lot of iteration ahead of them! Expect plenty of updates in that regard as time goes on.

Tick. Tock.

 

:P

Volkmar

Thank you for the answer, Brent :-)

I am not much sure about the Orks situation beside that the raving masses of f2p players might be a downside that balance I out. Why?

well, as an Ork commander, you have 2 choices: 1) ignore the boyz or

2) try to engage them in your strategies.

in the case of 1, many of those boyz will grow tired of the "elitism" of the leaders and either stop playing or become a customer of a different race leading to less Nobz in the Ork army.

in case of 2 you are basically playing the lottery and you will get situations where  crucial boyz movement fail and you get hosed. That sounds a lot like the tabletop, so I would surel opt for 2

Savij

you all forget about the tyranids ^^ they will just eat orcs if there are to many

Rulgoth

Originally posted by freakishbean

Dude the whole point of the Ork tide is that Orks are cannon fodder, easy to kill. A hoard against some marines who KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING can easily be dispatched.

You obviously missed the point about 40k being about tactics.

Enough with the roleplaying. I'm talking about balance. Giving one faction many more people, possibly multiple times the amount of other factions is just plain stupid. Particularly if your reason is "because lore." Look at it this way.. this is not a tabletop. It's not an RTS. It's a live-action third person shooter. It is not a simple ratio of 5 boyz to every marine. Bullets can miss, you can ambush, you can have tactical advantages, you can simply have better players. I guarantee you a single "boy" will be able to kill a marine, it just depends on who is playing.  That said, I have no doubt they will see how reckless this is before launch and alter it.. so I'm not really concerned with it, just wanted a response from the devs.  (Edit - thanks for the response btw, Brent. About what I expected, but was just wondering.)

As far as tactics.. well.. I lol'd reading the interview at that part. What shooter doesn't claim to require strategy? Anyone here ever play PS2? Whole lot of tactics there, amirite? Buzzcutpsycho anyone? Miguel all but claimed they were having somewhere around 4000~ player battles. If he wasn't talking about PS2's continent cap then he was being a bit misleading. Furthermore, he claimed a guild of navy seals(as if you need to be in the military to know strategy) could defeat 3 entire factions in about 2 weeks without even trying. Sorry, not buying it. There will be no strategy beyond small unit tactics and very little subterfuge when fighting against 1000-3000 enemies, I guarantee you that as well.

Savij

Originally posted by Rulgoth

Originally posted by freakishbean

Dude the whole point of the Ork tide is that Orks are cannon fodder, easy to kill. A hoard against some marines who KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING can easily be dispatched.

You obviously missed the point about 40k being about tactics.

Enough with the roleplaying. I'm talking about balance. Giving one faction many more people, possibly multiple times the amount of other factions is just plain stupid. Particularly if your reason is "because lore." Look at it this way.. this is not a tabletop. It's not an RTS. It's a live-action third person shooter. It is not a simple ratio of 5 boyz to every marine. Bullets can miss, you can ambush, you can have tactical advantages, you can simply have better players. I guarantee you a single "boy" will be able to kill a marine, it just depends on who is playing.  That said, I have no doubt they will see how reckless this is before launch and alter it.. so I'm not really concerned with it, just wanted a response from the devs.  (Edit - thanks for the response btw, Brent. About what I expected, but was just wondering.)

As far as tactics.. well.. I lol'd reading the interview at that part. What shooter doesn't claim to require strategy? Anyone here ever play PS2? Whole lot of tactics there, amirite? Buzzcutpsycho anyone? Miguel all but claimed they were having somewhere around 4000~ player battles. If he wasn't talking about PS2's continent cap then he was being a bit misleading. Furthermore, he claimed a guild of navy seals(as if you need to be in the military to know strategy) could defeat 3 entire factions in about 2 weeks without even trying. Sorry, not buying it. There will be no strategy beyond small unit tactics and very little subterfuge when fighting against 1000-3000 enemies, I guarantee you that as well.

well we will have a beta first so everything is fine

if the orcsystem really fails then they just can add some weak classes to every faction

and then balance the amount of free players for each faction that they are always almost even

 

 

Sciva

Originally posted by Gorwe
Miguel, this advice is IMPORTANT(!!!):

Don't make the same mistake WAR did and forget to advertise in White Dwarf/Hammer n Bolter. That advertising is a M.U.S.T. Why? To this day 80%(if not more lol!) of Fantasy TT/WHFRP players haven't heard of Warhammer Online(because it wasn't mentioned at the places they frequent/in the literature they read). Please DO Heed this advice(it's 24466% friendly)

Anyhow, cheers!

Awhile back they advertised WOH in white dwarf with no mention of WAR, i found that kind of sad.

Nonderyon

Originally posted by Volkmar

Thank you for the answer, Brent :-)

I am not much sure about the Orks situation beside that the raving masses of f2p players might be a downside that balance I out. Why?

well, as an Ork commander, you have 2 choices: 1) ignore the boyz or

2) try to engage them in your strategies.

in the case of 1, many of those boyz will grow tired of the "elitism" of the leaders and either stop playing or become a customer of a different race leading to less Nobz in the Ork army.

in case of 2 you are basically playing the lottery and you will get situations where  crucial boyz movement fail and you get hosed. That sounds a lot like the tabletop, so I would surel opt for 2

1.) ignoring the leaders meaning : they are weak in the first place untile got some fame(they are smart boyz) and the "players" start to following them, BUT anyway, what we know, doing what the leaders want is benefitical to you/us/me(xp...etc.)...but we shall see what the system looks like when open beta begins.

2.)Ork and strategy dont exist at the same place, oh wait, i am wrong, but its name "waaaaagh" or something(ask an ork about it).

 

 

Savij

Originally posted by Nonderyon

Originally posted by Volkmar

Thank you for the answer, Brent :-)

I am not much sure about the Orks situation beside that the raving masses of f2p players might be a downside that balance I out. Why?

well, as an Ork commander, you have 2 choices: 1) ignore the boyz or

2) try to engage them in your strategies.

in the case of 1, many of those boyz will grow tired of the "elitism" of the leaders and either stop playing or become a customer of a different race leading to less Nobz in the Ork army.

in case of 2 you are basically playing the lottery and you will get situations where  crucial boyz movement fail and you get hosed. That sounds a lot like the tabletop, so I would surel opt for 2

1.) ignoring the leaders meaning : they are weak in the first place untile got some fame(they are smart boyz) and the "players" start to following them, BUT anyway, what we know, doing what the leaders want is benefitical to you/us/me(xp...etc.)...but we shall see what the system looks like when open beta begins.

2.)Ork and strategy dont exist at the same place, oh wait, i am wrong, but its name "waaaaagh" or something(ask an ork about it).

 

 

cant wait to see the first waaagh running into my bolterfire pew pew pew!

freakishbean

I'm highly interested to see how the 40k universe will also be represented outside of combat.

MumboJumbo

Originally posted by freakishbean
I'm highly interested to see how the 40k universe will also be represented outside of combat.

I seem to remember reading Caron is a fan of strategy games (?). If so that's the layer above combat I think that will be developed in tandem ie non-combat?

miguelcaron

Dear Fans, I am back after a crazy long weekend moving house!! :-(

I just wanted to answer 3 quick questions/comments I have read here.

 

1-White Draft visibility: It comes with the deal I signed with Games Workshop :-)

2-Beside combats, how we will treat the story in your game: Well, EVERY actions you will do IS in line with the war effort. You will never have to bring a box of chocolate to Ms. Smith nor will you see a Dark Angel forging a sword. We will have tons of none combats activities but all geared towards the war efforts.

3-Last, I was reading a comments from one of you who is worried about balance with the Orcs F2P: When I say WAR is NOT balance, I mean the balance is not just about population size nor is it only about the faction/class strentgh and weakness but more of the WAY you use it. While I was doing my university in a military college in Polemology (Strategic and Military studies) we have a class (very very tough class!!) on War Mathematics where General use algorithm to forcast the future of the war. Each strategies (guerilla, conventinal, naval, etc) had its own algorithm and each tactic and tools (soldier, tanks, mines) had their values attached to it. Playing with these math you see that balance can ''almost'' always be achieved but its asymetric balance. A chess Game is balance, but a Queen vs a Pawn is NOT balance nor are you guarantied winning if I switch 2 of your pawn for a Knight. One F2P Orc Boys alone might feel underpower BUT if he has a good Orcs Noobs Officer that bring good tactics that maximise the Orcs Boys strenght (numbers, melee, surprise, etc..) then he will feel like Super powerfull. Same with Eldars. The way I will play my Eldars is following one of Sun Tzu teaching: A true General has already won the way when for the first time he step on the battlefield. I will destroy ALL the enemy Outpost and cut their supply chain so when the big battle arrives.... I will see a bunch of Dead Emperors fans doing clic clic clic with their Bolters!!!! :-)

 

And yes...... Reveal 2 is ''MOST LIKELY'' will be done this week. We are trying very hard for it.

 

Regards

There is ONLY WAR

Miguel

Your studio Head Behaviour Online

dinams

Originally posted by miguelcaron

Dear Fans, I am back after a crazy long weekend moving house!! :-(

I just wanted to answer 3 quick questions/comments I have read here.

 

1-White Draft visibility: It comes with the deal I signed with Games Workshop :-)

2-Beside combats, how we will treat the story in your game: Well, EVERY actions you will do IS in line with the war effort. You will never have to bring a box of chocolate to Ms. Smith nor will you see a Dark Angel forging a sword. We will have tons of none combats activities but all geared towards the war efforts.

3-Last, I was reading a comments from one of you who is worried about balance with the Orcs F2P: When I say WAR is NOT balance, I mean the balance is not just about population size nor is it only about the faction/class strentgh and weakness but more of the WAY you use it. While I was doing my university in a military college in Polemology (Strategic and Military studies) we have a class (very very tough class!!) on War Mathematics where General use algorithm to forcast the future of the war. Each strategies (guerilla, conventinal, naval, etc) had its own algorithm and each tactic and tools (soldier, tanks, mines) had their values attached to it. Playing with these math you see that balance can ''almost'' always be achieved but its asymetric balance. A chess Game is balance, but a Queen vs a Pawn is NOT balance nor are you guarantied winning if I switch 2 of your pawn for a Knight. One F2P Orc Boys alone might feel underpower BUT if he has a good Orcs Noobs Officer that bring good tactics that maximise the Orcs Boys strenght (numbers, melee, surprise, etc..) then he will feel like Super powerfull. Same with Eldars. The way I will play my Eldars is following one of Sun Tzu teaching: A true General has already won the way when for the first time he step on the battlefield. I will destroy ALL the enemy Outpost and cut their supply chain so when the big battle arrives.... I will see a bunch of Dead Emperors fans doing clic clic clic with their Bolters!!!! :-)

 

And yes...... Reveal 2 is ''MOST LIKELY'' will be done this week. We are trying very hard for it.

 

Regards

There is ONLY WAR

Miguel

Your studio Head Behaviour Online

 

Kudos for posting in here

It takes balls to be a dev and come to the highly volatile realm that is mmorpg.com

freakishbean

Always a pleasure to see you post boss You mean phase 2 reveal? I look forward to it with much anticipation. I'm a US Army Vet myself and understand fully the logistics of wartime spending.

Savij

hope we may get first pics on that reveal

 

you do a great job guys couse you are like "touchable" for us ^^ thats damn sympatic

freakishbean

It may be too early for in game assets - but concept art always tickles the fancy

Ehliya

Only two issues.

 

Tyranids being controlled by the developers to "balance" campaigns: that seems to contradict the hands-off attitude he professed earlier.  It seems a better road to simply let the players sort it out.  If the Space Marines outnumber everyone, then the factions can decide to ally.  Or, after a campaign or two of Space Marine domination, you will see people joining other factions to balance them.  Also, it seems strange the Tyranids would be acting as any sort of "Cosmic Balance."  Their intervention should be more random. In fact, random activity by the Tyranids could be a great side activity for people to practice and train.  You could have Tyranid spawns protecting rare resources.  And you could also have Tyranids spawning and if no one deals with them earlier, they multiply and start to threaten everyone.  But Tyranids controlled by the game company?  There are so many landmines in that road it beggars the mind...

 

Ork Boyz needing five to kill one Space Marine - sounds good in theory but in reality maybe not.  This reminds me of Lord of the Rings Monster Play at release.  You needed many monsters to defeat fewer Free Peoples.  Granted at that time everyone was a subscriber.  But it ended up that many people playing Monsters could not handle getting owned by fewer Free Peoples.  I think even with FTP you will have a hard time keeping Ork Boyz numbers up - not many like being cannon fodder in video games.

freakishbean

Originally posted by Ehliya

Only two issues.

 

Tyranids being controlled by the developers to "balance" campaigns: that seems to contradict the hands-off attitude he professed earlier.  It seems a better road to simply let the players sort it out.  If the Space Marines outnumber everyone, then the factions can decide to ally.  Or, after a campaign or two of Space Marine domination, you will see people joining other factions to balance them.  Also, it seems strange the Tyranids would be acting as any sort of "Cosmic Balance."  Their intervention should be more random. In fact, random activity by the Tyranids could be a great side activity for people to practice and train.  You could have Tyranid spawns protecting rare resources.  And you could also have Tyranids spawning and if no one deals with them earlier, they multiply and start to threaten everyone.  But Tyranids controlled by the game company?  There are so many landmines in that road it beggars the mind...

 

Ork Boyz needing five to kill one Space Marine - sounds good in theory but in reality maybe not.  This reminds me of Lord of the Rings Monster Play at release.  You needed many monsters to defeat fewer Free Peoples.  Granted at that time everyone was a subscriber.  But it ended up that many people playing Monsters could not handle getting owned by fewer Free Peoples.  I think even with FTP you will have a hard time keeping Ork Boyz numbers up - not many like being cannon fodder in video games.

I don't mind the 'Nids coming in to balance things out here and there. If a faction is doing complete and total steamroll, it gets boring really quickly. Warhammer Online had that non-stop, it was steamroll after steamroll. The 'nids make it so an effort still must be made to win the planet. 

It's still a skill-based game, so and Ork player who is pretty good can still wreck some faces. He'll probably have standard weapons and equipment, maybe a special weapon here or there. Orks still get to use Big Shootas and Big Sluggas and explosives. I'm thinking health and melee strength wise, they don't compare to a Space Marine. 

But hey, they are free. And numerous.

Savij

Originally posted by Ehliya

Only two issues.

 

Tyranids being controlled by the developers to "balance" campaigns: that seems to contradict the hands-off attitude he professed earlier.  It seems a better road to simply let the players sort it out.  If the Space Marines outnumber everyone, then the factions can decide to ally.  Or, after a campaign or two of Space Marine domination, you will see people joining other factions to balance them.  Also, it seems strange the Tyranids would be acting as any sort of "Cosmic Balance."  Their intervention should be more random. In fact, random activity by the Tyranids could be a great side activity for people to practice and train.  You could have Tyranid spawns protecting rare resources.  And you could also have Tyranids spawning and if no one deals with them earlier, they multiply and start to threaten everyone.  But Tyranids controlled by the game company?  There are so many landmines in that road it beggars the mind...

 

Ork Boyz needing five to kill one Space Marine - sounds good in theory but in reality maybe not.  This reminds me of Lord of the Rings Monster Play at release.  You needed many monsters to defeat fewer Free Peoples.  Granted at that time everyone was a subscriber.  But it ended up that many people playing Monsters could not handle getting owned by fewer Free Peoples.  I think even with FTP you will have a hard time keeping Ork Boyz numbers up - not many like being cannon fodder in video games.

your infos are out of date bro^^

tyranids will be AI only, no devs there just the big Hive mind called AI

 

and they already said that with da orkboys was a mistake, they will have good chances in melee even alone