Really I've looked at it objectfully, but my complaints were pretty much taken care of because of Mythics excellent communication within the community. The game has a WoW level of polish here and the RvR (a mechanic that really doesn't change except for different objectives, locals, ect.) was incredibly fun.


You can NOT COMPARE age of Conan's 1-20 and Warhammers. You just can't. Age of Conan was a largely single player game 1-20, and was incredibly and obscenely different than 21-80. Warhammers 1-20, on the other hand, is much closer to the idea of 1-30 in vanilla WoW. Not much changes except for end game when you hit 60.

I've seen all of the esteemed mechanics working in warhammer. I've watched player made city siege videos. I've watched player made castle siege videos. All of these were nice, smooth and looked fun to play.

I've taken part of HUGE RvR fights already (T1 chaos vs empire was at least a 75v75 over preview weekend just going back and forth, running near flawlessly).


Really I don't want to be a fanboy but I just can't see much that really... worries me about this game. Age of Conan I kind of blindly followed, but warhammer I've done my research. Most of the players who seem to really dislike it wanted a DAoC2.0 or are just waiting for Darkfall and frown upon any "easy mode" MMORPG's.



I will say that the amount of gear did worry me, but then I saw trophies. I was worried (horribly) that the combat would be slow, but I played it and it was great and they are improving on it more.

Really though, I know the AoC and WAR comparisons are inevitable, but please just compare them. Mythic is so much more open than Funcom ever was with their community. Plus, Funcom had AO behind them... Mythic had DAoC.