Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Camelot Unchained - 500 Player Battles - Possible?

124

Comments

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 11,687
    Rusque said:
    This type of claim pops up every now and then. I'll believe it when it's live and with actual players.
    You can watch the videos yourself, whether they are bots or actual players isn't all that significant difference. 

    It is very much believable, technically it was always possible, it is only a matter of what you will trade off for large scale pvp and whether there is a demand for such games - that is also a reason no such MMOs are being made.
    meddyckfrancis_baud
  • RusqueRusque Member RarePosts: 2,783
    Gdemami said:
    Rusque said:
    This type of claim pops up every now and then. I'll believe it when it's live and with actual players.
    You can watch the videos yourself, whether they are bots or actual players isn't all that significant difference. 

    It is very much believable, technically it was always possible, it is only a matter of what you will trade off for large scale pvp and whether there is a demand for such games - that is also a reason no such MMOs are being made.
    We'll see, I won't hold my breath.
  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,177
    What was the latency between bot clients and server?

    This is key in simulating real world performance, as latency is directly related to maximum bandwidth throughput from server back to clients

    I didnt see latency figures mentioned anywhere.
    Torval
  • MightyUncleanMightyUnclean Member EpicPosts: 2,556
    I've got another question that concerns me:  Will huge battles just be a wild zerg?  Are the only significant attacks going to be AoE?  How do you pick a target out of the masses and stick with it in combat?
  • RemyVorenderRemyVorender Member RarePosts: 3,822
    I'm hoping that number is the reason the game looks like complete ass. 

    Played: AA, AC1, AC2, Aion, AO, AoC, BDO, CO, CoX, DAoC, DCUO, EVE, EQ1, EQ2,
    ESO, Fallen Earth, FFXI, FFXIV, GW1, GW2, Istaria, L2, LoTRO, MxO, Neverwinter, Rift, RoE,
    Ryzom, Shadowbane, SWG, SWTOR, TERA, TSW, WAR, WoW, WURM...and a bunch of others not worth mentioning.


    Joined - July 2004

  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,660
    DMKano said:
    What was the latency between bot clients and server?

    This is key in simulating real world performance, as latency is directly related to maximum bandwidth throughput from server back to clients

    I didnt see latency figures mentioned anywhere.
    Yeah, it's pretty hard to simulate network routing (latency and jitter) down to the last mile. That's also mostly out of their control.
    francis_baud
    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

    It only took 3 people 8 words to rock Blizzard to its core.
  • WizardryWizardry Member LegendaryPosts: 16,452
    I've got another question that concerns me:  Will huge battles just be a wild zerg?  Are the only significant attacks going to be AoE?  How do you pick a target out of the masses and stick with it in combat?
    exactly !!

    Far more important than quantity of combatants is the quality of the combat.

    If i just wanted to run up and AOE 30 players ,i could go play some cheap ass Diablo type ARPG and mindless spam until i die.
    I much prefer controlled,tactical,thinking combat,i detest going in wild and spamming.
    So yeah ,just like game play >graphics,i want quality over quantity.

    Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.

  • TheocritusTheocritus Member EpicPosts: 7,036
    Are there even 500 people playing it?
  • MightyUncleanMightyUnclean Member EpicPosts: 2,556
    Are there even 500 people playing it?

    I think there will be tons when the beta hits.  I hope.
    Realizer
  • time007time007 Member UncommonPosts: 1,054
    edited August 2017
    Well, its been done to the degree that I liked it in ESO,  but i HATED ESO's RVR/WVW reward system.  I dont want to kill x players to get points so i can buy a caltrops skill that slows another player for 2s, then kill x players to buy x skill. then game the system so we can keep flipping emperor so all my buddies get it.

    i liked daoc's skill system which was kill x players and get +1 to all skills and so forth exponentially.  so i'm hoping CU is able to capture the same rewards system they had in daoc.

    i think in regards to large scale battles, its been done ok before with ESO in its heyday good enough for my liking.  
    Kyleran

    IMPORTANT:  Please keep all replies to my posts about GAMING.  Please no negative or backhanded comments directed at me personally.  If you are going to post a reply that includes how you feel about me, please don't bother replying & just ignore my post instead.  I'm on this forum to talk about GAMING.  Thank you.
    image

  • MightyUncleanMightyUnclean Member EpicPosts: 2,556
    I liked the battle size in DAOC because it was still personal enough that you could pick an individual target and stick on it.  But in the early days, at least, AOE CC and DPS was devastating.  Too powerful.  Hopefully, CU finds a balance.
  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,660
    I liked the battle size in DAOC because it was still personal enough that you could pick an individual target and stick on it.  But in the early days, at least, AOE CC and DPS was devastating.  Too powerful.  Hopefully, CU finds a balance.
    That's been my question as well. What will meaningful combat look like in a group of 500 people? Can I contribute to the battle in a manner that will have an impact that I can see?

    It's great that mass combat won't be a freeze frame flash show. I've been in several of those and am ready for that to be tech history. But, I don't think simply removing performance problems instantly makes for quality battles. I'm curious how they're going to make those battles engaging.
    meddyck
    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

    It only took 3 people 8 words to rock Blizzard to its core.
  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,938
    Torval said:
    I liked the battle size in DAOC because it was still personal enough that you could pick an individual target and stick on it.  But in the early days, at least, AOE CC and DPS was devastating.  Too powerful.  Hopefully, CU finds a balance.
    That's been my question as well. What will meaningful combat look like in a group of 500 people? Can I contribute to the battle in a manner that will have an impact that I can see?

    It's great that mass combat won't be a freeze frame flash show. I've been in several of those and am ready for that to be tech history. But, I don't think simply removing performance problems instantly makes for quality battles. I'm curious how they're going to make those battles engaging.
    Large battles work well in EVE, I think because of its military style design and the very specific roles the ships have.

    Fleets are often very organized, with different comms for the scouts, battleships,  capital and sub capitals, and repair and support groups.

    Some groups fight at long range, others in close (tackle).  Some can disrupt enemy guns while others augument your own.

    So a fleet of 500 can have real meaning and be both a challenge and a thing of beauty when well coordinated. 

    I've even been in fleets where large portions spoke only Russian so translators were used to coordinate, fascinating fights those were.

    But EVE is fought much like a naval battle is, with much slower movement and combat.

    Not sure how well this can work in a game like CU where the action is much faster pace, there just isn't a lot of time to coordinate once the battle gets underway.

    Not impossible of course, but will take some careful design to give real meaning to the battles.
    Torvalpantaro

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,938
    I liked the battle size in DAOC because it was still personal enough that you could pick an individual target and stick on it.  But in the early days, at least, AOE CC and DPS was devastating.  Too powerful.  Hopefully, CU finds a balance.
    Another key point about large, well coordinated battles is as a "grunt " you pay little attention to how other parts of the fleet or company are doing.

    If you are artillery, you focus on appropriate long range targets and try to avoid the focused fire when it inevitably comes your way.

    Meanwhile the disruption fleets are entirely focused on locking down enemy fire while desparately trying to survive as long as possible as they normally are fragile and primary first in any fight.

    Like any game, repairers (healers ) spend most of battle watching the shield and armor levels of primarily the watchlist they are assigned and provide secondary support when they can spare the attention.

    Tackle is busy trying lock ships in place while defensive ships try to break enemy tackle. 

    Meanwhile scout  will remain in adjacent systems watching for additional enemy support that might be incoming. (Something I rarely have seen in games like DAOC.)

    Through all of this it mostly fleet and group commanders who pay attention to the big picture, frequently not even fighting much in order to stay focused.

    If some of this sounds too focused and not fun you are correct,  for many it is and why a large portion prefer to fight in small man fleets,  much like in DAOC many believe the single 8 man vs 8 fight to be the epitome of combat. 

    There should be room for a wide range of fights, between 8 and 1000, depends if there are enough meaningful objectives to make splitting up worthwhile. 

    TorvalJamesGoblinpantaro

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • meddyckmeddyck Member UncommonPosts: 1,274
    Are there even 500 people playing it?
    There are roughly 25000 backers so at launch the answer to your question will be: yes.
    Gdemami

    Camelot Unchained Backer
    DAOC [retired]: R11 Cleric R11 Druid R11 Minstrel R9 Eldritch R6 Sorc R6 Scout R5 Healer

  • lemonster.izoonelemonster.izoone Member UncommonPosts: 22
    I'm pretty tech-ignorant, so I'm looking for some expert opinions.  The Kickstarter for Camelot Unchained states that their goal is to "Maintain an absolute minimum of 30 FPS in battles of up to 500 people."  That's why they're building a custom engine:  no one else, apparently, has built an available engine that can do this.  My question is, is this even feasible with modern technology?  For a small team working with a relatively small budget?  Have others, especially AAA developers, tried and failed to achieve such a lofty goal?  I'm wondering if problems achieving this base programming goal are part of the reason that the game is still in a pre-alpha state after four years.  Again, I'm very ignorant of how this all works, so I'm looking for the opinions of programmers or network pros that know a lot about this.
    they just did it: http://camelotunchained.com/v3/bot-battles-and-bones-friday-july-28-2017/ "BTW, can you think of another game where you can run through a crowd of 1409 players at 44 FPS?" cheers 
    JamesGoblinpantaro
  • DMKanoDMKano Member LegendaryPosts: 21,177
    Torval said:
    DMKano said:
    What was the latency between bot clients and server?

    This is key in simulating real world performance, as latency is directly related to maximum bandwidth throughput from server back to clients

    I didnt see latency figures mentioned anywhere.
    Yeah, it's pretty hard to simulate network routing (latency and jitter) down to the last mile. That's also mostly out of their control.

    Last mile is always an issue but selecting thw lowest latency return path via best provider in real time from server to client can be controlled via BGP routing tuning solutions like Noction IRP - which Blizzard, CCP, Trion and other game hosting companies use.

    AWS doesnt - and BGP inherently has no latency awareness, so AWS doesnt know how to get around high latency providers when a better alternate lower latency path exists over a higher AS count (BGP less preferred) route.
    Torvalfrancis_baudKyleran
  • SEANMCADSEANMCAD Member EpicPosts: 16,775
    lemonaid said:
    I'm pretty tech-ignorant, so I'm looking for some expert opinions.  The Kickstarter for Camelot Unchained states that their goal is to "Maintain an absolute minimum of 30 FPS in battles of up to 500 people."  That's why they're building a custom engine:  no one else, apparently, has built an available engine that can do this.  My question is, is this even feasible with modern technology?  For a small team working with a relatively small budget?  Have others, especially AAA developers, tried and failed to achieve such a lofty goal?  I'm wondering if problems achieving this base programming goal are part of the reason that the game is still in a pre-alpha state after four years.  Again, I'm very ignorant of how this all works, so I'm looking for the opinions of programmers or network pros that know a lot about this.
    they just did it: http://camelotunchained.com/v3/bot-battles-and-bones-friday-july-28-2017/ "BTW, can you think of another game where you can run through a crowd of 1409 players at 44 FPS?" cheers 
    Not sure 1409 players but Mount and Blade for a small dev team is pretty impressive

    Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.

    Please do not respond to me

  • NanfoodleNanfoodle Member EpicPosts: 7,742
    Daybreak could not do it. They failed with Voxel tech but maybe CU dev team knows something Daybreak did not. Voxels in the end is what killed EQN from being a playable game. 
    Gdemami



  • MarkJacobsMarkJacobs CEO City State EntertainmentMember RarePosts: 648
    edited August 2017
    Nanfoodle said:
    Daybreak could not do it. They failed with Voxel tech but maybe CU dev team knows something Daybreak did not. Voxels in the end is what killed EQN from being a playable game. 
    You're correct in that using Voxels in a large-scale building game is a source of problems for many devs. It works great in small-scale games but large-scale, well, that would be a major PITA. That's why we don't use Voxels, but use blocks that are not able to be altered such as EQN and Crowfall wwew talking about during their Kickstarter (they were, at the time, both using the same Voxel engine). 

    DMKano said:
    Torval said:
    DMKano said:
    What was the latency between bot clients and server?

    This is key in simulating real world performance, as latency is directly related to maximum bandwidth throughput from server back to clients

    I didnt see latency figures mentioned anywhere.
    Yeah, it's pretty hard to simulate network routing (latency and jitter) down to the last mile. That's also mostly out of their control.

    Last mile is always an issue but selecting thw lowest latency return path via best provider in real time from server to client can be controlled via BGP routing tuning solutions like Noction IRP - which Blizzard, CCP, Trion and other game hosting companies use.

    AWS doesnt - and BGP inherently has no latency awareness, so AWS doesnt know how to get around high latency providers when a better alternate lower latency path exists over a higher AS count (BGP less preferred) route.
    Yep, once we get through most of Beta 1 we will start looking at different cloud providers. For now, AWS is easy to work for and is, well, the devil you know. :)

    I liked the battle size in DAOC because it was still personal enough that you could pick an individual target and stick on it.  But in the early days, at least, AOE CC and DPS was devastating.  Too powerful.  Hopefully, CU finds a balance.
    Me too. It will be difficult especially as Torval says below, as the number of people in a battle go up.
    Torval said:
    I liked the battle size in DAOC because it was still personal enough that you could pick an individual target and stick on it.  But in the early days, at least, AOE CC and DPS was devastating.  Too powerful.  Hopefully, CU finds a balance.
    That's been my question as well. What will meaningful combat look like in a group of 500 people? Can I contribute to the battle in a manner that will have an impact that I can see?

    It's great that mass combat won't be a freeze frame flash show. I've been in several of those and am ready for that to be tech history. But, I don't think simply removing performance problems instantly makes for quality battles. I'm curious how they're going to make those battles engaging.
    +1, QFT, etc.

    I need to keep my answer short, as we are in the middle of getting ready for a 500 Bot test with Backers but here's a few things to keep in mind.

    1) We (devs, players) need to separate a siege battle from an open field battle in our heads. 500 folks in a siege will feel very different from 500 in an open field.

    2) For sieges, a 500 person battle will, most likely, feel a lot more personal since, unless the attackers are dumb, they will be attacking the structure from different points. This will mean that it won't be 250 vs. 250, but rather smaller groups attacking the structure's defenses versus other smaller groups defending it. 

    3) For an open field battle, your ability to contribute visibly will depend on a lot on your class and your playstyle. If you are a DPS caster who likes to stay in the back and cast more powerful spells, you will see a less frequent (slower cast) but larger effect (bigger game) on a battle. On the other hand, if you are a melee DPS, you'll see less effect on a large battle unless you are focused on taking out specific targets ("Kill the clothies!") versus just looking for targets of opportunity.

    I could talk about this all day but I need to get back to work. I can come back later if asked/needed.
     



    SedrynTyrosTorvalfrancis_baudKyleranJamesGoblinpantaroRealizer

    Mark Jacobs
    CEO, City State Entertainment

  • MarkJacobsMarkJacobs CEO City State EntertainmentMember RarePosts: 648
    edited August 2017
    FYI, we're testing 500Bots (archers + fighters), with our Alpha and IT backers right now.

    My favorite comment so far  (from a Backer with a 4K monitor) - "impressive..even with fireworks im getting 45 FPS"

    Makes me smile. We're not there yet but 500 Bots + players make a pretty good Alpha test. 

    Hit 1K, server ran great, shut down the test as scheduled.
    Post edited by MarkJacobs on
    CecropiaMarcus-SedrynTyrosKyleranTorvalJamesGoblinpantaro

    Mark Jacobs
    CEO, City State Entertainment

  • KyleranKyleran Member LegendaryPosts: 33,938
    I appreciate the candor and your many replies Mark, never change.

    On an unrelated note I tried Googling you to see your previous games and now I'm being pushed ads for Marc Jacobs women's clothing and cosmetics.   :/

    Maybe you can straighten Google out on who the "real Mark" is.


    JamesGoblinmeddyckcameltosis

    "See normal people, I'm not one of them" | G-Easy & Big Sean

    "I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant

    Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing POE at the moment.

    Fools find no pleasure in understanding, but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV

    Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™

    "This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon






  • TorvalTorval Member LegendaryPosts: 19,660
    Kyleran said:
    I appreciate the candor and your many replies Mark, never change.

    On an unrelated note I tried Googling you to see your previous games and now I'm being pushed ads for Marc Jacobs women's clothing and cosmetics.   :/

    Maybe you can straighten Google out on who the "real Mark" is.


    Maybe it's his crafting alt. :lol:
    KyleranJamesGoblinmeddyckcameltosispantaro
    take back the hobby: https://www.reddit.com/r/patientgamers/

    traveller, interloper, anomaly
    ༼ つ ◕◕ ༽つ

    It only took 3 people 8 words to rock Blizzard to its core.
  • MarkJacobsMarkJacobs CEO City State EntertainmentMember RarePosts: 648
    edited August 2017
    Kyleran said:
    I appreciate the candor and your many replies Mark, never change.

    On an unrelated note I tried Googling you to see your previous games and now I'm being pushed ads for Marc Jacobs women's clothing and cosmetics.   :/

    Maybe you can straighten Google out on who the "real Mark" is.


    While I have changed over the years, it's mostly for the better. :) Nobody's perfect, but I'm always trying to get better at everything I can get better at (sadly, no more b-ball for me). In terms of candor, yeah, I'm still as candid as I've been in the past (not counting my time at EA where I had to be incredibly careful about what I said) and I still won't attack other devs/games, that will never change.
    Torval said:
    Kyleran said:
    I appreciate the candor and your many replies Mark, never change.

    On an unrelated note I tried Googling you to see your previous games and now I'm being pushed ads for Marc Jacobs women's clothing and cosmetics.   :/

    Maybe you can straighten Google out on who the "real Mark" is.


    Maybe it's his crafting alt. :lol:
    Nice, well played.



    FYI, we'll be running another test today, geared to our European Backers time-wise.

    Edit: Update - First part of the European-focused test was not a rousing success (it was hinky) but the 2nd hour+ was great. 1K Bots, people connecting from all over the world and great performance. We hit a bump once we went over 1K, but we think we know what the problem is and should be able to fix that quickly.

    As he was heading out the door, one of our client-focused programmers told me that he fixed a bit of old code that now is new and improved code that got us a nice increase in rendering time per frame.

    Today was a very good day.
    Post edited by MarkJacobs on
    TorvalJamesGoblin

    Mark Jacobs
    CEO, City State Entertainment

  • TamanousTamanous Member RarePosts: 2,993
    Latest big bot battle tests peaked over 2600 bots! Mark managed to run a character through the mass mob with smooth fps, latency and no rubber banding.

    Obviously this was a heavy stress test and not a benchmark for release battles. It is sick tech though. Mark even stated it only fell slightly short of how many total players even resided on orginal Daoc servers ... and this is only in one immediate battle.

    You stay sassy!

Sign In or Register to comment.