Well, I actually like planetside2 and hearing that we would get something similar in the warhammer 40k universe was just "WOW!" to me. Being able to play as warhammer 40k character in big wars.
Also what's interesting is having all factions versus eachother, and if one faction is dominating the others can group up to take that faction out.
Lots of possibilities when there is big wars going on. It's also fun driving around in the world, in a small group capture posts along the way to have mini-battles if you feel like it, but also participate in the large fights when you feel like it.
It's really fun to have all the factions fighting eachother, and I really hope something like that gets implemented even though we most likely won't be getting an mmo. However I wish for it to be an mmo and I hope they give us information asap in where they are at when it comes to that.

I could not disagree more. A game that requires guild coordination, heavy roleplaying immersion and active player dicipline is not a finished and complete game; it's a game that requires the players to work to get the game to work propably. I should not feel forced to put so much work into a game; it should definately be a good thing to do, and help me play the game better, but it should never be mandatory.

Let's say I'm a new Boy player jumping into this cool game. I'm not a part of anything, and I don't play competetively or in guilds or clans; I just want to have fun and contribute in a battle somewhere. Just imagine how jarring it would be to suddenly realize that, to play the game propably, you need to work and strategize everything, before it even gets possible to have fun and fight. If I were him, I'd get the hell out then and there; that's simply too much bull to handle. I just want to have fun, not do vector mathematics!

I'm kinda like that myself. I like to be a part of a guild for social reasons, but I am in no way a guild player, and I hate to feel like I have obligations towards a game I play in my spare time for fun. It's my game; so I decide what to do. And if the game punishes me for that, then I'm just not gonna play the stupid game. It's what makes TF2 a great multiplayer game, really; you can just jump in and assume a role just like that. You don't need no communication, no guild; you just go in and have fun. Sometimes you even grow a little community that way.

So no; to me, EC does not become a game to wait for, when we, as players, have to pour large amounts of time and effort into it just to have it work propably.

This is the end result of a TeamWork game. Severe Emphasis on Teamwork. You can be an amazing player, and an awesome player, but the next level is Teamwork. Clans are great socials areas, but many of them help teamwork flourish. There is a reason the term PUBS exists. Different Clans have different cultures as well, and your level of dedication and preference will determine which (if you even do) clan to join. You can jump in, right now and in the future I imagine and play. But, like many other games, there will exist people who want to play together in large groups to perfect their ability to win objectives. In the forums, there already exists recruitment branches. In the game, there are already clans that populate entire teams; and generally, they do better. Just like in TF2, there are clans and sometimes invade PUB servers just to "PUB stomp." Video game fact of life.
In short, you can enjoy the game solo still; but active organized clans will dominate this game in my opinion.

I think part your original question is interesting, OP. Why is it that Warhammer 40k in particular is regarded as being so ideal for a mass combat game?

I'd say it's probably because 40k has by far the most cohesive and diverse setting for combined arms combat, well, anywhere. This should resonate with anyone who played PS2. The factions there were pretty bad IP wise, to the point of feeling "secondhand". They didn't feel coherent, or original, or motivated, and hell they didn't even look very good.

Warhammer doesn't have that problem. The Imperium, Orks, Eldar, Tyranids, they all have a very powerful identity that's been solidified over the better part of two decades. And they also have a lot of content. Factions have 5 or 6 tank types minimum, with their battlefield roles already defined from years of tabletop play. Each faction has their entire troop roster already laid out, as can be seen in the clean implementation of EC's classes. And they're all very unique and distinct, meaning any game that's based off of a warhammer IP has huge asymmetry built in. Where half the time it's impossible to distinguish between PS2's Terrans and New Conglomerate without the colors, nobody's going to mix up an Eldar with a Ork, in appearance or playstyle.

The other aspect of this, "why are the huge battles so important", also has to do with the IP. A bit part of 40k's popularity is the feeling of scale of the whole endeavor. This is also benefitted by the identity and diversity of each faction. Palling around with generic squadmates is one thing, but being part of a warhost backed by 7 different tanks and surrounded by hundreds of specialized troops has a very different feel. And for those of us who played the tabletop game, adding a top down strategy above the ground-shooter is also hugely appealing.

I guess the point is that where other games would have to reinvent the wheel for a massive combined arms shooter, for Warhammer, it's all already there. It feels like regardless of budget, just based on faction identity alone, it'd have to be sorta good at least. And personally, that's why I still haven't backed out, despite everything that's happened in the past year.

When did I say I didn't want to cooperate? I want to cooperate all the time! I just want to have a game that requires me to work outside the game's parameters to work ingame. You can make highly effective teams in TF2 by just working together; they won't touch the proffs of course, but you can play the game like that without anyone shaking their stick at them.

That's what I want. A game designed for me to drop in and immideatly be a part of a battle without any communication and no overly complicated measures to even play propably. The game is aiming for that; with Warlords being able to place objectives and stuff, it's already halfway there. I just don't see how "MMO w/ 500 people and one consistent world" helps that.

While there's sure to be people who will take the "don't hate on teamwork" angle on this, you actually make a really good point. A game that doesn't require 3 different kinds of 3rd party chat apps and social media sites just to get a platoon organized would be a breath of fresh air. That's why I'm still holding out for some serious top-down command tools a-la Nuclear Dawn and Natural Selection - they pave the way for anyone to be a useful team member, whether they're a pug or guildmember alike.

That's not emphasis on Teamwork, it's reliance on teamwork. Ad hoc groups of players together are coordinating. That is teamwork. Teamwork does not require clans or teamspeak. Teamwork is not the sole domain of groups of established players dominating the rest of the playerbase. Writing off the players who don't want to take part in this because of a so-called "video game fact of life" is both unfair and irresponsible from a development standpoint.

In-game factions are the first and foremost method of grouping players into teams, and these factions will always be bigger than clans/guilds/warparties/whatever. This filters down into Clans, Platoons, Squads, and then finally to individual players. In an ideal game environment 30 Chaos Space Marines with no clan ties and no microphones should be able to effectively coordinate a defense against 30 Space Marines in a premade group.

You can claim that this is impossible, or that the premade winning is just a "video game fact of life," but I don't agree. In fact, I think such a mindset is a hindrance to development and an off-hand assumption of superiority. Appealing to the status quo is not a fact, it's a fallacy.

Orks are better, plus we get more players to kill since they are f2p.

Besides the fact that I intend to start a Chaos Biker gang to go around looting, pillaging and razing everything possible there's also the increased strategic element that comes from having an open world, 3 or 4 way battles, ambushes, immersion bonuses, unpredictable battlefields, imense and changimg frontlines, and the simple joy of exploration that we can call "scouting" for RP purposes.

So, lots of things. I'm more surprised that there's people against it. Orks especially since the Free2WAAAGH is pretty much dependant on an open world to be viable for implementation.