Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
MASSIVE PVP Sieges = 48vs48
Melkrow
Member Posts: 278
Playing: Darkfall Unholy Wars
Played: Darkfall, EVE, AoC, Ryzom, Ragnarok Online, GW2, PS2, Secret World, WOW, City Of Heroes/Villains, Champion Online.
Comments
If this bothers you...then don't buy the game. That simple. Oh, and another thing, if you would have took the 15secs to look on the forums, you would have noticed that this info you just gave us, that you think is so vital. Guess what, it was given to us already.
I'm no stranger to not liking Age Of Conan but I must say, 48 vs 48 is more than enough.
What's wrong with that?
How many do you want to see in the screen at the same time? I thought alterac valley in WoW in terms of numbers was more than enough. When it got crowdad in the screen u didnt survive more than seconds. There is no synchronized attacks a la Lord of the Rings Moive. There is only zerg. 48 vs 48 is more than enough!
Yeah, "HUNDREDS OF PLAYERS" was the plan.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=9TTsDVeurU8
I was expcting 100vs100 minimum, as Funcom was boasting many times how they manged to have 300+ people on screen at the same time.
<modedit>
Playing: Darkfall Unholy Wars
Played: Darkfall, EVE, AoC, Ryzom, Ragnarok Online, GW2, PS2, Secret World, WOW, City Of Heroes/Villains, Champion Online.
I stated around this number yesterday...i said 50v50, how did i know with out this 'hidden information' because i read funcom official site and read this months and months ago.
This is not new...this is not news. This is another fail at stiring trouble.
Anyone who had a real interest and kept up at official forum should have been able to figure this out already.
Funcom said massive seige battles, this figures are just about right, anymore and people could be completely crushed by larger guilds, this gives a smaller tightghtly knit guild the chance to own a city and hire mercenaries to fill any numbers up come the time of a seige.
"Trump is a blunt force, all-American, laser-guided middle finger to everything and everyone in Washington, D.C." - Wayne Allyn Root
Well, seeing as how your wrong, I suppose i'll let you go on your lack of information. I do suggest buying a computer that doesn't come out of a crackerjack box though.
~ ~
Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths, Enwrought with golden and silver light, The blue and the dim and the dark cloths Of night and light and the half light, I would spread the cloths under your feet: But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
Well did they offer it yet? No.Well, seeing as how your wrong, I suppose i'll let you go on your lack of information. I do suggest buying a computer that doesn't come out of a crackerjack box though.
I don't think that 1400 Euro portables with 8600GT, 3 GByte of Ram and 2x200 GB HD in Raid at 7200 RPM (!) are "crackerjack" boxes.
Answers it all...
uhh... 8600GT is not exactly High end. thats a value card from nvidia. If you expect to play on high settings with a 8600 and have no issues while playing with people around, I would suggest atleast putting them in SLI, otherwise drop your settings some more. As for your double harddrives, well harddrive speed has little to do with performance compared to your other parts.For anyone who wishes to build or upgrade a new computer your best bet is worrying about processor/mobo/gcard/ram speed before even thinking about your "fast" 7200rpm harddrive.
~ ~
Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths, Enwrought with golden and silver light, The blue and the dim and the dark cloths Of night and light and the half light, I would spread the cloths under your feet: But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
If they had no cap on siege battles, the topic would probably be "MASSIVE PVP Siege = LAGFEST" and people would be crying for a cap in threads like these.
48v48 sounds good, it might sound bad but you don't realize any more and it would kill your system. Don't mind at all and if you had anymore it would be a nightmare to get all of them to defend the batlekeep and a nightmare to give tactics to them.
I agree, Anything past 50 is nothing more than a zerg, and only bring down the quality of a real battle. It definitely would not be pretty for about 70% of the playerbase(including me) who are not able to have top of line machines to handle anything over 100 players.
~ ~
Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths, Enwrought with golden and silver light, The blue and the dim and the dark cloths Of night and light and the half light, I would spread the cloths under your feet: But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
I agree, Anything past 50 is nothing more than a zerg, and only bring down the quality of a real battle. It definitely would not be pretty for about 70% of the playerbase(including me) who are not able to have top of line machines to handle anything over 100 players.
Agreed also.
48 vs 48 is perfect, allowing;
If you don't think 48 guildies gathered in one area with war mounts, spell weaving, and siege machines is a cool sight in an MMORPG, or any game for that matter, then you and not the game have the problem.
The only people who fear a fair fight are those who know they can't PvP.
I can play TF2 16v16 and dont need even pay month fee, or CSS 32v32. What the fucking bullshit.
to pay now 15€ every month so i can play with 20-30 ppl. so vrong.
I agree, Anything past 50 is nothing more than a zerg, and only bring down the quality of a real battle. It definitely would not be pretty for about 70% of the playerbase(including me) who are not able to have top of line machines to handle anything over 100 players.
Agreed also.
48 vs 48 is perfect, allowing;
If you don't think 48 guildies gathered in one area with war mounts, spell weaving, and siege machines is a cool sight in an MMORPG, or any game for that matter, then you and not the game have the problem.
The only people who fear a fair fight are those who know they can't PvP.
And what point play mmorpg if u can pvp in others games 32v32? mmorpg pvp should be chaotic/huge battlefield, not fucking counter-strice sandbox.
You have all that backwards, sorry. FPS games are meant to be played with a high number of players on screen, which is pretty obvious why. As for mmorpgs, they have a lot more issues to deal with when it comes to players on screen, specially when the demands for high res textures and particles are so high.
It would not be impossible to have more then 100 players on screen, but what would be the point? I honestly don't want to be zerged by 100 players, that's not a fight, thats just stupid, and it isn't fun.Graphics and performance aside, I think anything over 100 players only diminishes the real fight and turns it into a zergfest with no real fun to be had.
It is going to feel huge, look huge and best of all feel fun. I can't wait, and I'm sure once everyone gets to see how it really looks and feels they will understand why anything more then 50v50 is not going to work in this game, at this point in time.
~ ~
Had I the heavens' embroidered cloths, Enwrought with golden and silver light, The blue and the dim and the dark cloths Of night and light and the half light, I would spread the cloths under your feet: But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have spread my dreams under your feet; Tread softly because you tread on my dreams.
LOL. I seem to remember some fanbois being hurt by my claims that FC didn't have the talent to pull off 200v200
---
And when we got more women on the team, it was like No, no, no. We need puppies and horses in there.
John Smedley, SOE
You have all that backwards, sorry. FPS games are meant to be played with a high number of players on screen, which is pretty obvious why. As for mmorpgs, they have a lot more issues to deal with when it comes to players on screen, specially when the demands for high res textures and particles are so high.
It would not be impossible to have more then 100 players on screen, but what would be the point? I honestly don't want to be zerged by 100 players, that's not a fight, thats just stupid, and it isn't fun.Graphics and performance aside, I think anything over 100 players only diminishes the real fight and turns it into a zergfest with no real fun to be had.
It is going to feel huge, look huge and best of all feel fun. I can't wait, and I'm sure once everyone gets to see how it really looks and feels they will understand why anything more then 50v50 is not going to work in this game, at this point in time.
Then u should play pve. PvP is not for every one. War is ALWAYS unfair, if u cant handle that, u are pve player.
yes ONLY 48 vs 48, so? i have done smaller that was ok with me
and it doesnt matter cause ppl will play it anyway...
<modedit>
MMOs currently playing: -
About to play: Lord of the Rings Online
Played: Anarchy Online (alltime favorite) and lots of f2p titles (honorable mentions: 9Dragons, Martial Heroes, Dekaron, Atlantica Online)
It worries me that Funcom openly told us a lie when they said the sieges would be several hundreds players attending battlekeepsieges at the same time.
What else did they lie about.
I'm still buying the game because it seems to have a very solid base with some very fun classes and good idea with playercities and battlesieges but i just wish developers would come out in the open and just tell the truth instead of making people disappointed later on.
___________________________________________
You have all that backwards, sorry. FPS games are meant to be played with a high number of players on screen, which is pretty obvious why. As for mmorpgs, they have a lot more issues to deal with when it comes to players on screen, specially when the demands for high res textures and particles are so high.
It would not be impossible to have more then 100 players on screen, but what would be the point? I honestly don't want to be zerged by 100 players, that's not a fight, thats just stupid, and it isn't fun.Graphics and performance aside, I think anything over 100 players only diminishes the real fight and turns it into a zergfest with no real fun to be had.
It is going to feel huge, look huge and best of all feel fun. I can't wait, and I'm sure once everyone gets to see how it really looks and feels they will understand why anything more then 50v50 is not going to work in this game, at this point in time.
Then u should play pve. PvP is not for every one. War is ALWAYS unfair, if u cant handle that, u are pve player.
This isnt a war.
It's a game.
As a game it has to take more into consideration then just your need to zerg and gank. Only someone who knows they cannot actually PvP fears a level play field.
Have you actually played a MMORPG before?
As for Arskaa saying "I can play TF2 16v16 and dont need even pay month fee, or CSS 32v32. What the fucking bullshit. to pay now 15€ every month so i can play with 20-30 ppl. so vrong."
This is not a FPS. I know thats an obvious statement, but it's one people seem to miss when they make statements like this one. A MMORPG offers so much more, and thats what you pay for. If you want a pure free fantasy PvP experience then maybe Fury would be more to your liking, or maybe just stick with your free FPS games.
Noone is forcing you to play this game, unless you think there is something extra here worth paying for.
Personally, I do.
I agree, Anything past 50 is nothing more than a zerg, and only bring down the quality of a real battle. It definitely would not be pretty for about 70% of the playerbase(including me) who are not able to have top of line machines to handle anything over 100 players.
Agreed also.
48 vs 48 is perfect, allowing;
If you don't think 48 guildies gathered in one area with war mounts, spell weaving, and siege machines is a cool sight in an MMORPG, or any game for that matter, then you and not the game have the problem.
The only people who fear a fair fight are those who know they can't PvP.
And what point play mmorpg if u can pvp in others games 32v32? mmorpg pvp should be chaotic/huge battlefield, not fucking counter-strice sandbox.
Are you actually capable of expressing any opinion without resorting to swearing? It just makes you look dumb you know right?
Noone has written in stone anywhere what a MMORPG should be have they?
AoC is what it is. Either sign up to it and enjoy yourself or get outta the way so others can without listening to your angry tantrums.
Seriously, I have never experience a 'community' thats is so over sensitive and as easy to offend as MMORPGers... It's ridicolous.
Omg this shouldn't be true, its rly not enough number... If its true, im very disappointed. I hope its not....Then is it castle siege or home siege?
It should be at least 80vs80. Btw lagfest isn't my job, its funcom server job. There will be lots of discussions in guilds coz many guild have more than 48 members. And It seems this again go to instanced pvp game....
Welcome new Alterac Valley
If it's a game breaking issue for you, go play something else! You will be missed...
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Give a fish a man and he will eat for a month!
48 is a good number and anyone who plays a game like Medieval II will know this. Lag would be terrible. Sieging in a game is nothing like raiding. You have to play by tactics and not just stand around in a circle beating a mob to death. To coordinate an attack or defense with hundreds of people would only hurt your game play.
Dark Age of Camelot.
There - this shoots down right about 90% of all appeasers.
48 is MASSIVE? Obviously you never played DAoC in its prime. Planetside still boasts 400 player battles per planet and reaches poplock during prime time on a regular basis. 96 is a fine number and if that's the best they can do, then I guess it's cool, but it's definitely not MASSIVE.
MMOs Played: EQ 1&2, DAoC, SWG, Planetside, WoW, GW, CoX, DDO, EVE, Vanguard, TR
Playing: WAR
Awaiting 40k Online and wishing for Battletech Online
even with the chance of it lagging i would rather have a more open environment, i remember L2 when we had to stop a zerg of 100 people with only 50 that is epic, yes sure it did lag at some point but the whole experience was awesome, zerg fest usually loose against a well organized group, and i was really looking forward to people banding together in zergs trying to take down organized groups, and vice-versa.