Warhammer Online - Review @ Games Radar

[Dhruin]

Games Radar serves up a lengthy review of WAR, calling it the most significant MMO release since WoW and praising the integration of Realm vs Realm, the Public Quests and polish. The score is 9/10 and here's a grab:

Its Realm vs Realm aspect is a river that runs deep, not a superficial trickle of extra features. It isn’t MMO v2 by a long shot, but it is a response to rather than simply an imitation of WoW. As well as incorporating Mythic’s own
RvR concepts from Dark Age of Camelot into a current-gen game, it’s identified much of what has and hasn’t proved successful in the last three years of MMOs. As a result, compared to all the other post-WoW MMOs, WAR is both dramatically more ambitious and an odd admission of failure on the entire genre’s part. Where others have tried to set themselves up as huge worlds full of discovery and mystery, a place for adventurers, this is perhaps more cynical.

More information.

 

[Zloth]

I remember one of the big selling points for Dark Age of Camelot was that it launched smoothly. I think it might have been the first MMO to ever do that. Good to hear they care keeping their image up!

 

[DArtagnan]

I find it interesting that while everything stated in that review is true, the single biggest issue with the game - which is evident from the first few minutes of play - is entirely omitted.

The combat system.

For a review that directly compares WAR with WoW, it's rather odd that this aspect goes unmentioned. Many people agree that WoW, whatever you might think of it otherwise, has the most fluid and responsive combat system of any MMO, except perhaps for Age of Conan. It's not like it's a minor part of gameplay, as you pretty much spend all your time doing nothing but fighting, especially in WAR which offers very few alternative ways of keeping busy.

I could go into great detail about the problems with combat and rigid class design/balance, which to me are the largest failings of WAR - but suffice it to say that if you're on the fence about it - be aware that there is a potentially gigantic obstacle to your enjoyment, if you're at all into fast paced gameplay.

With that said, I will admit that the game has grown on me. I've nearly given up for good several times, but it's been a while since I had that desire. The strengths of WAR - while few in numbers - are rather strong, much to my surprise. Getting past the clunky feel and the restrictive sports-like structure took a great effort, but I'm finally starting to enjoy the game for what it is. A large-scale fantasy sports game with RPG elements.

 

[Maylander]

For once, I'm going to completely ignore a game no matter how much praise it gets. With WoW: Wrath of the Lich King on the horizon (release date: 13th of Nov, 2008), I simply don't have the time to play WAR.

 

[Hedek]

I find it interesting that while everything stated in that review is true, the single biggest issue with the game - which is evident from the first few minutes of play - is entirely omitted.

The combat system.

For a review that directly compares WAR with WoW, it's rather odd that this aspect goes unmentioned. Many people agree that WoW, whatever you might think of it otherwise, has the most fluid and responsive combat system of any MMO, except perhaps for Age of Conan. It's not like it's a minor part of gameplay, as you pretty much spend all your time doing nothing but fighting, especially in WAR which offers very few alternative ways of keeping busy.

I could go into great detail about the problems with combat and rigid class design/balance, which to me are the largest failings of WAR - but suffice it to say that if you're on the fence about it - be aware that there is a potentially gigantic obstacle to your enjoyment, if you're at all into fast paced gameplay.

With that said, I will admit that the game has grown on me. I've nearly given up for good several times, but it's been a while since I had that desire. The strengths of WAR - while few in numbers - are rather strong, much to my surprise. Getting past the clunky feel and the restrictive sports-like structure took a great effort, but I'm finally starting to enjoy the game for what it is. A large-scale fantasy sports game with RPG elements.

I agree but I might have an explanation to this omission:
The people writing about WAR so far have all been in the beta and thus been playing the game for quite some time now (up to a year for the alpha testers which include several of the professional gaming websites reviewers). Not people who just bought the released box and give their "first impressions" after 2 or 3 days of playing despite Gamespy's wrongfully called "out of the box" article.

And I can totally see/understand/agree with WoW players who try WAR for the first time and feel the combat system is slow and unresponsive.

My point though is that perhaps it feels unresponsive because specifically you have WoW still fresh in your memory, you're used to WoW's pace and the longer you play WAR the more you forget about WoW's pace and stop comparing and suddenly it no longer becomes a problem since you simply don't feel it's slowER anymore.

Now don't get me wrong I indeed liked WoW's responsive combat (until 1 hour+ arena fights appeared that's when I started hating WoW's combat and left the game) but I think it's only a matter of comparison and it's only a problem during the first week or so of playing the game.

I'm looking forward to hearing your opinion again in say a month of playing only WAR and no WoW at all: if you still feel the combat system is kind of ackward then indeed your complaint is a valid one.

I'm also willing to put up with WAR's less responsive combat system if that means less lag / delay which is mandatory for enjoying the large scale RvR that WAR boasts. Now if that wasn't done for lag I agree they could work a bit on making the combat system more fluid.

And I also hope future patches will bring more creative spells and abilities to make classes more fun.
But Mythic isn't known for making "funny" classes and I'm thinking DAoC here.

 

[DArtagnan]

I agree but I might have an explanation to this omission:
The people writing about WAR so far have all been in the beta and thus been playing the game for quite some time now (up to a year for the alpha testers which include several of the professional gaming websites reviewers). Not people who just bought the released box and give their "first impressions" after 2 or 3 days of playing despite Gamespy's wrongfully called "out of the box" article.

And I can totally see/understand/agree with WoW players who try WAR for the first time and feel the combat system is slow and unresponsive.

My point though is that perhaps it feels unresponsive because specifically you have WoW still fresh in your memory, you're used to WoW's pace and the longer you play WAR the more you forget about WoW's pace and stop comparing and suddenly it no longer becomes a problem since you simply don't feel it's slowER anymore.

Now don't get me wrong I indeed liked WoW's responsive combat (until 1 hour+ arena fights appeared that's when I started hating WoW's combat and left the game) but I think it's only a matter of comparison and it's only a problem during the first week or so of playing the game.

I'm looking forward to hearing your opinion again in say a month of playing only WAR and no WoW at all: if you still feel the combat system is kind of ackward then indeed your complaint is a valid one.

I'm also willing to put up with WAR's less responsive combat system if that means less lag / delay which is mandatory for enjoying the large scale RvR that WAR boasts. Now if that wasn't done for lag I agree they could work a bit on making the combat system more fluid.

And I also hope future patches will bring more creative spells and abilities to make classes more fun.
But Mythic isn't known for making "funny" classes and I'm thinking DAoC here.

I appreciate what you're trying to say, but it would be simpler for us all if we just stuck to facts and didn't try to brainwash ourselves. Some things work, others don't. In a world as nuanced and grey as the one we live in, we should cling to the few black and white areas we can, as we won't see nearly enough of them.

The combat system is clunky and unresponsive as it is right now, and nothing will change that fact unless the system itself changes. I've played 9 out of 10 MMOs since Ultima Online, and I know a clunky system when I see it. Even Vanguard, with a slow and relatively cumbersome feel to combat had a better feel than WAR. It's comparable to LOTRO, which represents the worst of the modern MMO combat systems before WAR, in terms of "feel".

I will always feel that way, but it's true that the problem wil have a lesser impact as I'm conditioned to it.

I also played Age of Conan quite extensively not long ago, and the combat there is even more responsive than the one in WoW, and yet I appreciate the system in WoW because of how much variety and thought goes into responding to what the mobs or players are doing. So far, in WAR, you pretty much unload what you have, because you don't really have time for anything else. The sounds and total lack of visceral feel makes it impossible to recognize what moves the enemies are doing, anyway, so you wouldn't know what to respond to if you had time. I'm sure as I get better and more experienced, I will slowly adapt - but even after dozens of hours it's far from intuitive and fluid.

It's an incredibly weak aspect of an otherwise excellent game, and the sooner we all admitted that - the sooner we could get on with what IS good in the game.

 

[Hedek]

I also played Age of Conan quite extensively not long ago, and the combat there is even more responsive than the one in WoW, and yet I appreciate the system in WoW because of how much variety and thought goes into responding to what the mobs or players are doing. So far, in WAR, you pretty much unload what you have, because you don't really have time for anything else. The sounds and total lack of visceral feel makes it impossible to recognize what moves the enemies are doing, anyway, so you wouldn't know what to respond to if you had time. I'm sure as I get better and more experienced, I will slowly adapt - but even after dozens of hours it's far from intuitive and fluid.

It's an incredibly weak aspect of an otherwise excellent game, and the sooner we all admitted that - the sooner we could get on with what IS good in the game.

Thanks a lot for clarifying. I wasn't trying to defend WAR as I don't own it yet and am not sure whether to jump in. Actually I could use the advice of someone who's played AoC too.
I betaed WAR for only about 3 days and barely had any time to play on that weekend. Did you leave AoC? How would you compare both games?
Your concerns about combat really hold me back as I'm really fond of PvP and PvP can only be fun if the combat system is balanced responsive and when player skill and situational awareness make a difference.

 

[DArtagnan]

Thanks a lot for clarifying. I wasn't trying to defend WAR as I don't own it yet and am not sure whether to jump in. Actually I could use the advice of someone who's played AoC too.
I betaed WAR for only about 3 days and barely had any time to play on that weekend. Did you leave AoC? How would you compare both games?
Your concerns about combat really hold me back as I'm really fond of PvP and PvP can only be fun if the combat system is balanced responsive and when player skill and situational awareness make a difference.

I left AoC for now, mostly because of no meaningful high end content and the endless broken promises made by the developers - specifically those related to PvP content. I still think the game has the greatest potential of all current MMOs and those of the immediate future, but I've grown extremely sceptical of anything related to Funcom - and I actually expect it to fail completely sooner or later. If they do manage to turn it around, I will most likely make it my MMO of choice - since I'm madly in love with the combat and non-structured possibilities of open world PvP.

As for WAR vs AoC, I don't think there's much to compare directly, because they're two completely different beasts. WAR, as I mentioned, is about a highly structured sports-like environment, with classes designed to fit a single or at least very few roles to complement each other, like in combined warfare. It's basically made so no one feels useless ever, and you will succeed if you work as a team. Your individual ability as a good player is of much less importance than your ability to work with your team and understand your limited role, and stay within it.

AoC is much less structured, and you'll be facing endless exploits or unfair situations, but in return you'll be able to excel as an individual player if you master your class, and your ability to play him well will be paramount. It's anarchy versus democracy, if you will.

The atmosphere and setting of the two games couldn't be more different, as Warhammer is a tongue-in-cheek "nearly cartoon" game, though I think many claim it's more mature than WoW, but to me they're two sides of the same coin. I can't really take anything seriously in either of them, because half of the quests are jokes. Let's say it's the difference between black comedy and normal comedy.

Also, WAR is a VERY focused and linear experience, in that you're constantly moving forward and you're guided along a narrow path - though you can of course ignore it at will. That said, it's also designed well and thought has been given to all the basics, and everything is extremely convenient and comfortable. Rewards come at a pretty constant pace, and unless you really dislike PvP, I'm sure you'll find it appealing for at least a few weeks. My own personal worry is that there's not enough variety to keep the game going beyond the first initial months. I'm only in the Tier 2 areas right now, and I'm not tired of it yet - but I have a hard time seeing myself doing the same kind of PvP for more than a few months. It really depends on the guild experience, and how much better the keep/city sieges will be.

But overall, I'd recommend it to almost anyone with an interest in PvP and a fresh take on the genre. Combat might be really weak, but the rest is pretty great.

 

[BlackVoid]

WAR, as I mentioned, is about a highly structured sports-like environment, with classes designed to fit a single or at least very few roles to complement each other, like in combined warfare. It's basically made so no one feels useless ever, and you will succeed if you work as a team. Your individual ability as a good player is of much less importance than your ability to work with your team and understand your limited role, and stay within it.

You nailed it. Warhammer was a wargame originally. Although calling it sports is valid for core server, open PvP servers will offer you more opportunities to gank people (not a negative here).

A lot of people (me including) like organized warfare, where a good team of players on Vent kills waves and waves of disorganized PUGs. Fun just never ends .

In regards of clanky combat. I agree that AoC combat system is better in a "fun" way. Warhammer though brings some more strategy into the fight. It's like fencing. You faint, you strike, some abilities work after others, some depend on the career path, on enemy action etc. It is slower i agree, so you cant just unleash the macro on the enemies, but feels more like a rhythm game. Early levels don't have that many abilities to play with, so it definitely feels like slow. LOTR had the same mechanics BTW, and you mentioned that it was the worst to date, so i think it's just a matter of preference.

And I agree that some classes are fun, and some are not. I think they just wrapped up the production for the release. You an see that ironbreaker, shaman, and fire-wizard got some love from Mythic, and other classes not so.

Game is RvR, so PvE content is not up to the standards of the "core" PvE games like LOTROL or EQ2. So i think people who don't really like PvP, RvR or prefer questing and crafting a lot will be disappointed. I cant even call it crafting, it is more like a hobby, really .

 

[Hedek]

Thank you very much guys you can't imagine how much more informative useful and insightful that was rather than the so called "professional reviews".

I've always been a PvP player to the heart I guess WAR was made for me then

 

[woges]

From my limited play and even with it's flaws I think it's a game that could draw you in.

It has the design of old war games with an MMO character/gameplay draped over it. PVE seemed a little poor from what I saw but I don't think it was half as interesting as the big PVP or should I say RVR system. Quests nicely written though, lovely skyboxs, amazing assortment of trees (really, some people must of spent a lot of time on trees), patchy amimation (as in some great some bad), runs rather poorly on my system (beta client). It isn't as fluid as WoW nor does it have the feed back of the UI but it has some interesting things of it's own.

They censored that nice cinematic on the actual game install?

 

[Zloth]

I don't think I'm understanding this "responsive combat" term. To me, a game being unresponsive means you click an ability/spell/whatever and nothing happens for awhile instead of having the ability/spell/whatever start animating immediately. I don't think I've ever seen that in an MMO except when the servers are bogged down or my own internet connection has gone bad. Do you folks mean something else?

 

[Hedek]

I don't think I'm understanding this "responsive combat" term. To me, a game being unresponsive means you click an ability/spell/whatever and nothing happens for awhile instead of having the ability/spell/whatever start animating immediately. I don't think I've ever seen that in an MMO except when the servers are bogged down or my own internet connection has gone bad. Do you folks mean something else?

You understood correctly, perhaps you just didn't notice it in games.
Two examples of unresponsive combat:
DAoC when it first came out. Clicking a combat ability would only affect your next attack, meaning from the moment you click on something, that action is queued, and nothing happens until your character is "available" to do what you asked him to. And there were close to no instant spells.
In WoW, take the warrior class, there are 2 types of warrior abilities: "Instant" (such as Charge or Mortal Strike) and "next attack" (such as Heroic Strike) if the warrior class in WoW only had the latter, combat would feel unresponsive.

The advantage of unresponsive combat is that you do less actions per 10 seconds, you send less requests to the server, the server has less things to do, you're less affected by lags. It's almost like a turn based games (albeit very short turns), everyone in DAoC only "plays" every 2-3 seconds.
In a responsive combat system, players notice every single lag spike. If anything that's supposed to be instant doesn't happen instantly you'll feel something is wrong. If however the action is only supposed to come with your next action, you may not notice that the next action came 2.25 seconds later rather than 2.0 seconds.

So there you have it, in responsive combat systems (much like FPS games) when you click on something or hit a key on your keyboard it's supposed to happen RIGHT NOW. In unresponsive combat systems orders you input don't necessarily happen right when you input them.

 

[DArtagnan]

Actually, it's a bit more involved than that - but it's sufficient to get the point across.

But I should note that the GCD and delays on actions aren't the only problems with the combat system as it is, which is why I described it as clunky as well as unresponsive. The problem is also largely due to the extremely poor feedback - both in terms of visual indicators, but also very much the limited sound effects. A good combat system will have VERY distinct sounds for all stand-out abilities and it should have equally distinct visual indicators whenever something important happens. Again, WoW is infinitely superior in this case. Think of the little sounds and indicators when a Rogue gouges his target, or a Warlock fears his - you simply have no way of not noticing those things. Who doesn't become instantly paranoid when they hear the "stealth" sound in WoW?

In Warhammer - everything pretty much sounds the same, at least to my ears, and it's extremely difficult to notice buffs and debuffs on players. It's really just horrible in this regard, and when you consider that it's ALL about fighting, there is NO excuse for something to be of this low quality in a game that is in direct competition with WoW.

I think the absolute worst example is the ranged projectile mechanic and aesthetics in WAR. This game has the worst bow/arrow visuals and animations of any 3D game I can recall from the past 5-10 years. It looks and feels absolutely atrociously bad to be a Shadow Warrior or similar. Arrows stop and change flight path in mid-air, or they suddenly go in extremely slow motion, or they jitter like they're being electrocuted and so on. It's laughably bad.

It's really quite sad, because there are so many good things and so many things done right in the game, that if they could have had the very core of the mechanics done equally well - I think it just might have tipped the scale enough to be a serious threat to the population of WoW. As it is now, there are too many people who will stay away, simply because of this single problem. It's THAT huge.

Oh, and about "strategy". I have studied my abilties as a Witch Hunter and a Shadow Warrior quite closely, and though there are many neat actions and cool stuff there, there is nothing to challenge the stuff that goes on in a WoW duel or BG in terms of acting and re-acting. There might be more strategy in the true sense of the word, meaning your preparation is more important than your actual performance during play, but the variety of what you do in a fight and how much you need to learn and remember is quite insubstantial compared with WoW. I know this is yet another WoW vs WAR comparison, but I don't think it's fair to mislead anyone. This is by design, mind you, as it goes back to the one-role design of classes, and though you have a handful of tools for unforeseen events, the vast majority deal with your specific role. In WoW - all classes have the ability to defeat all other classes - inherent in the design - though some pairings require rare specs and what not, but it's not a "combined arms" game in the same way as WAR. Some people mistakenly think of WoW as "rock-paper-scissors" but it's not, though I guess it might have started that way in the design phase.

I still recommend WAR on its strengths, but I refuse to downplay the weaknesses as they are significant and they're needed for a fair and objective assesment.

 

[Reyla]

WoW is a single player game where you have to group sometimes for gear that will help you solo better.

War is a multiplayer game.

Not praise or condemnation of either. Simply, if you like to solo and treasure hunt, WoW will appeal to you. If you like to join large PvP battles and strategize, War will appeal to you.

Just my opinion having played both.

 

[DArtagnan]

WoW is a single player game where you have to group sometimes for gear that will help you solo better.

War is a multiplayer game.

Not praise or condemnation of either. Simply, if you like to solo and treasure hunt, WoW will appeal to you. If you like to join large PvP battles and strategize, War will appeal to you.

Just my opinion having played both.

Interesting point of view that conflicts rather heavily with reality, but who's keeping score

Everything worth doing in WoW happens in a group, be it arena, BGs, raids, or 5-man instances. Unless, of course, you solely enjoy the levelling process, and nothing else. It's true that you don't have to group to level up in WoW, as is the case with WAR - but in both cases it's irrelevant as the ability to play something alone doesn't directly relate to the definition of a singleplayer game, as that's a game that can ONLY be played alone.

That said, I will agree that WoW is definitely a very gear-oriented game and it's also a game that requires you to grind, in one way or another, to obtain good gear. WAR is exactly the same, with less emphasis on gear and more emphasis on coordinated effort. WoW raids and arenas require a very strong group effort, but gear counts for more - or so is my impression of WAR - that gear is easily obtainable and not nearly as impactful on class efficiency.

If for some reason you prefer WAR, there's really no need to present false information to support your own point of view. I'm sick of WoW myself, and especially the grind aspect - but truth cares little for emotional bias - and will remain even if we abandon it.

 

[BlackVoid]

I don't know, I hated WoW from the first sight, i managed to get to level 10 and went back to EQ2. May be i didn't give it a chance, but i just couldn't force myself to play it. So i can't really say anything good or bad about the game.

On the other hand i was in WAR beta since August 2007 and leveled up one of my chars to 33. Complexity of WAR RvR is exponential. You start getting RvR advanced points and morale abilities and you can spec your tank to be a main tank, an off-tank or support tank. Same mechanics exist for healers or rogues (healers can produce good damage, be a crowd control, buffer etc)

What you are saying is true, but for some people me including it is non-essential compared to the things we like. Yes, bow animation sucks big time. Yes, there is no visual or sound feedback to your actions. Is it a game-breaker? Not for me. It is much easier to fix that than adjust class balancing or to create a new battleground.

When we were in beta 1, game was very uninspiring to say the least, they closed it, got back to the drawing boards and restarted the beta. I tend not to trust developers on the promises to fix things, but so far there is nothing in WAR (for me) which prevents me from enjoying the ride. If there is a pause in the game, like i'm waiting for RvR to start i just read The Tome of Knowledge, which is magnificently done.

i don't want to sound like a fanboi, i just like the Warhammer universe. So i enjoy the black humor and all those little details in the world and the lore.

Like a goblin chained to the one of Big Berta's cannonballs, or the "joke" of one of the shamans who was stuffing drunk stunties into the barrels and dropping them into the river so big stupid orcs thought it's some kind of devious attack plan. Or puny snotlings who were originally the masters of orcs, until orcs ate the magic mushrooms and snotlings became stupid. that kind of stuff.

 

[Roland]

Was pretty excited about WAR, then I played the beta...while the functionality of the game seemed solid to me (good enough) the Classes just didn't pull me in.

In all honesty the whole process felt blah to me for some reason, maybe I was hoping for a darker setting...not sure?

So I decided to hold off on any P2P MMO at the moment and I'll focus on Sacred 2 when it comes out.

On a side note, I played WOW for a year and 1/2. Played it casually and mostly solo. I enjoyed questing and exploring and running a few of the lower instances. I don't have large chunks of time to play in one sitting so this worked out for me. Got to lvl 57 with my Pally and had fun with several other characters as well.

I've tried EQ2 twice now and just can't get excited about the setting, again a case of nothing standing out (for me), not a fan of the muted colors or the character designs really.

Though there is a lot to do in the game, it just didn't hold my interest enough.

In AoC (beautiful design and darker, more serious setting) it was the lack of meaningful loot (limited loot table?) that made the game seem bland to me.

Maybe I'm hard to please or just looking for specific things that are scattered through many different MMOs but lacking in any one game.

(As far as F2P MMOs I have enjoyed 2Moons)

I find it interesting that WOW held my attention the longest, and that was after Lineage 2 and EQ2...

But it had a lot of things I felt were done well, Art direction, game features, expansive world, large random loot table, crafting, ability to play and make progress when playing solo or limited time.

I wish WAR had held more excitement for me

 

[Hedek]

Thanks everyone for the advice. I ended up buying Warhammer Online (together with a new video card: ATI 4670 up from NVIDIA 7300LE) and I totally love it.

QPs are brilliant. Being able to join a scenario from anywhere, all the time, and getting xp and money while doing so is amazing. I like the large choice of classes over WoW. My only gripe so far is the warrior: WoW's warrior class was a lot of fun to play (especially with charge and intercept) and so far none of the tank classes of WAR gave me the same adrenaline, but and it's a big but I haven't passed lvl 10 with any of my characters yet and WoW's warrior was extremely dull in PvP until you reached lvl 40 and got some decent equipment so I really can't compare my lvl 10 swordmaster to my lvl 70 wow warrior.

I heard many complaints about PvE people saying it's ok but not great. Well I like it, quests are varied, sometimes you're even asked to shoot things with catapults and stuff, and the tome of knowledge is like the ultimate tool for PvE lovers.

I know it's strictly a matter of taste but I never liked WoW's comic style and prefer WAR's art even though it's true it has less personnality.

Performance/FPS is ok given my rather low budget rig (everything is 2 years old except the newly bought US$90 ATI 4670 video card). I'm between 30 and 50 frames per second in high quality settings and I switch to low quality in RvR just to be safe.
The game has been very stable for me, no lag, no crash, no nothing. My framerate does slow down a little if I play more than 4 or 5 hours in a row forcing me to restart the computer to get it back to normal performance.

My only problem is... deciding which class to play is overwhelming! I rolled like 10+ characters so far and can't make up my mind.

Congratulations to Mythic for making a solid well polished game. And I'm just glad I'm giving my money to something else than Blizzard: the MMO market NEEDS competition to evolve and improve.

 

[BlackVoid]

We had a RvR zerg this saturday (3 warbands) and it was the mother of all lags. We took all the keeps in T1 and T2, but server was lagging like hell, couldn't even click people, they were warping all over the place.

PQ are great in T1, then they all build the same, stage 1 wit htrash mob, stage 2 with champ mobs, stage 3 is a hero and 3 champ sidekicks. It gets very repetetive, but it's a great way to grind some levels.

Also if you are an altoholic let your toons rest, so you get double XP from kills.

Usually start doing RvR when you are about lvl *8 of the tier. Otherwise you are helping the opposing team. While it gives you stats of *8 level, you don't have all the special abilities your true lvl *8 counterparts have. So they get 500 RvR points for scenario win and level up faster and get the advantage in T3.