Are you looking forward to huge player battles in CU?

MightyUnclean · April 2020

Assuming Camelot Unchained makes it to release and performs as promised, are you guys looking forward to battles with hundreds and hundreds of players fighting at once? Do you think it will make for incredible, intricate battles? Or do you think it will be a massive zerg clusterfuck where individual actions will have little impact outside of AoE damage and CC abilities? With that many players on screen, how do you think single-target attackers will be able to pick out and stick with targets?

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

I don't think huge battles with a massive number of players would be all that interesting without collision detection between players and the possibility of friendly fire. Players should also be able to use the environment/terrain, structures, battlements, stacks or piles of boxes/crates, debris, etc. to their advantage. If siege engines, siege towers, ladders, and/or battering rams are employed, they should be able to be destroyed. Players should be able to hurl rocks and spill boiling pitch down on top of other players trying to assault their castle. Anything flammable, including player characters, should be able to catch fire. Castle walls and towers should be able to be destroyed/knocked down (and possibly fall on top of attackers).

ChildoftheShadows · April 2020

I've been in large battles in both Eve and Darkfall and I can say that I don't mind really large battles but prefer small to medium fighs. Since Eve is spaceships I'll use DFO as the example. The larger fights were 400ish people in a given area, many more considering it was spread over multiple locations. The smaller 50v50 fights were much more enjoyable because there were enough people that it was intense and chaotic, but not so much that you had little clue as to what was really going on.

I personally don't think the effort is going to be worth it and they're wasting efforts. Just my 2c.

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

ChildoftheShadows said:

I've been in large battles in both Eve and Darkfall and I can say that I don't mind really large battles but prefer small to medium fighs. Since Eve is spaceships I'll use DFO as the example. The larger fights were 400ish people in a given area, many more considering it was spread over multiple locations. The smaller 50v50 fights were much more enjoyable because there were enough people that it was intense and chaotic, but not so much that you had little clue as to what was really going on.

I personally don't think the effort is going to be worth it and they're wasting efforts. Just my 2c.

Large-scale battles in the real world are/have been very chaotic. Soldiers/combatants are often just reacting to whatever happens and doing their best to survive. Only very highly skilled and experienced combatants can really be proactive and think more clearly in such situations. Games can be easier and more difficult at the same time because we can't smell, taste, feel (or perhaps employ as much sixth sense or intuition) than if we were really there. We also have far less options in simulated video game battle as opposed to a real-life battle.

ChildoftheShadows · April 2020

Ancient_Exile said:

ChildoftheShadows said:

I've been in large battles in both Eve and Darkfall and I can say that I don't mind really large battles but prefer small to medium fighs. Since Eve is spaceships I'll use DFO as the example. The larger fights were 400ish people in a given area, many more considering it was spread over multiple locations. The smaller 50v50 fights were much more enjoyable because there were enough people that it was intense and chaotic, but not so much that you had little clue as to what was really going on.

I personally don't think the effort is going to be worth it and they're wasting efforts. Just my 2c.

Large-scale battles in the real world are/have been very chaotic. Soldiers/combatants are often just reacting to whatever happens and doing their best to survive. Only very highly skilled and experienced combatants can really be proactive and think more clearly in such situations. Games can be easier and more difficult at the same time because we can't smell, taste, feel (or perhaps employ as much sixth sense or intuition) than if we were really there. We also have far less options in simulated video game battle as opposed to a real-life battle.

Eh?

Wizardry · April 2020

The second poster "get's it".

Simply having a large scale battle doesn't make it good or even the entire game good.

There is a lot that can and should go into combat if your doing it in a rpg setting.Balance will ALWAYS be an issue,one that no developer on the planet will ever do right.
I also saw or i mean did not see one the biggest ideas in a pvp design and that was the lack of Z-axis fighting.

So think about it just a little,if you had a player on a high ledge shooting arrows or magic,what chance would a melee player have down below?Answer is ZERO and why you could never balance something like that unless you just remove the idea altogether which dumbs down your game design.

Even if a ranged type player wasn't using any defensive positioning,how would a melee stand a chance even at distance?Like if you were in a real life battle and some dude had a gun,would you run at that person with your sword?Of course not,you would run for cover and only engage if up close.

So the whole idea is ,let's just plop down a bunch of players,call it Siege warfare and let them figure it out.I just cannot see these rpg pvp designs as ever being any good at all.

jdnyc · April 2020

I'm just looking for the game to come out.

Vrika · April 2020

I think the huge fights won't be good. Fighting is more fun when people and their small group can make difference. Once the battle starts to grow too large a lot of that is lost.

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

Vrika said:

Ancient_Exile said:

ChildoftheShadows said:

I've been in large battles in both Eve and Darkfall and I can say that I don't mind really large battles but prefer small to medium fighs. Since Eve is spaceships I'll use DFO as the example. The larger fights were 400ish people in a given area, many more considering it was spread over multiple locations. The smaller 50v50 fights were much more enjoyable because there were enough people that it was intense and chaotic, but not so much that you had little clue as to what was really going on.

I personally don't think the effort is going to be worth it and they're wasting efforts. Just my 2c.

Large-scale battles in the real world are/have been very chaotic. Soldiers/combatants are often just reacting to whatever happens and doing their best to survive. Only very highly skilled and experienced combatants can really be proactive and think more clearly in such situations. Games can be easier and more difficult at the same time because we can't smell, taste, feel (or perhaps employ as much sixth sense or intuition) than if we were really there. We also have far less options in simulated video game battle as opposed to a real-life battle.

Imho the question isn't what it would be in reality, the question is whether it's good game.

I think it won't be. Fighting is more fun when people and their small group can make difference. Once the battle starts to grow too large a lot of that is lost.

War isn't fun. War is hell. Whether or not war is waged should depend on the advantages to be gained by a faction for doing so.

But war in a medieval fantasy MMORPG could be designed to be more fun than it would be in reality. It's just that players have to be prepared for the fact that the likelihood of their characters surviving the battle will probably not be very good. Especially when attacking a castle or fortification. Defenders usually have a great advantage in such scenarios. That's why those laying siege would often try to starve out a castle's defenders rather than attacking head on. However, if the attacking force had vastly superior number and/or if time was of the essence, a full-scale assault might be worth the risk.

Of course, magic and/or divine/infernal power could possibly be used the to turn the tide in a fantasy setting. Depends on which side has more powerful mages and/or priests.

Iselin · April 2020

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Iselin · April 2020

Ancient_Exile said:

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Correct. And that principle plays itself out all the time in the types of games that feature these types of battles.

You have the clueless ones with no leader who think it's all a functions of having more players than the other guys. When they go against a smaller but well led and experienced group they are quickly nothing but free kills.

All that is required from 90% of the participants is the ability to listen and follow orders. The other 10% in the command structure need to know the game well enough to come up with a plan, communicate that plan on a need to know basis (spies you know) and react to the unexpected when it happens.

I've played A LOT of this type of PvP with a lot of different people. It's no coincidence that the ones who are best at it usually have some military command experience. These battles simulate military engagements instead of gang fights in the ghetto or muggings like a lot of other types of PvP do. It's the only type of PvP I really enjoy.

Vrika · April 2020

Iselin said:

Ancient_Exile said:

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Correct. And that principle plays itself out all the time in the types of games that feature these types of battles.

You have the clueless ones with no leader who think it's all a functions of having more players than the other guys. When they go against a smaller but well led and experienced group they are quickly nothing but free kills.

All that is required from 90% of the participants is the ability to listen and follow orders. The other 10% in the command structure need to know the game well enough to come up with a plan, communicate that plan on a need to know basis (spies you know) and react to the unexpected when it happens.

I've played A LOT of this type of PvP with a lot of different people. It's no coincidence that the ones who are best at it usually have some military command experience. These battles simulate military engagements instead of gang fights in the ghetto or muggings like a lot of other types of PvP do. It's the only type of PvP I really enjoy.

The issue is that the majority who just listens to orders aren't having that much fun once the battle gets large. Doing the same thing repeatedly as per your orders until you get orders to do another thing repeatedly is really effective, but for the repeaters who don't see the big picture and whose job is to stfu and not affect the strategy beyond executing the order it's not fun.

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

Vrika said:

Iselin said:

Ancient_Exile said:

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Correct. And that principle plays itself out all the time in the types of games that feature these types of battles.

You have the clueless ones with no leader who think it's all a functions of having more players than the other guys. When they go against a smaller but well led and experienced group they are quickly nothing but free kills.

All that is required from 90% of the participants is the ability to listen and follow orders. The other 10% in the command structure need to know the game well enough to come up with a plan, communicate that plan on a need to know basis (spies you know) and react to the unexpected when it happens.

I've played A LOT of this type of PvP with a lot of different people. It's no coincidence that the ones who are best at it usually have some military command experience. These battles simulate military engagements instead of gang fights in the ghetto or muggings like a lot of other types of PvP do. It's the only type of PvP I really enjoy.

The issue is that the majority who just listens to orders aren't having that much fun once the battle gets large. Doing the same thing repeatedly as per your orders until you get orders to do another thing repeatedly is really effective, but for the repeaters who don't see the big picture and whose job is to stfu and not affect the strategy beyond executing the order it's not fun.

Doesn't basically the same thing happen in Raids?

EDIT: Being on the winning side is usually kinda fun and/or rewarding.

Vrika · April 2020

Ancient_Exile said:

Vrika said:

Iselin said:

Ancient_Exile said:

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Correct. And that principle plays itself out all the time in the types of games that feature these types of battles.

You have the clueless ones with no leader who think it's all a functions of having more players than the other guys. When they go against a smaller but well led and experienced group they are quickly nothing but free kills.

All that is required from 90% of the participants is the ability to listen and follow orders. The other 10% in the command structure need to know the game well enough to come up with a plan, communicate that plan on a need to know basis (spies you know) and react to the unexpected when it happens.

I've played A LOT of this type of PvP with a lot of different people. It's no coincidence that the ones who are best at it usually have some military command experience. These battles simulate military engagements instead of gang fights in the ghetto or muggings like a lot of other types of PvP do. It's the only type of PvP I really enjoy.

The issue is that the majority who just listens to orders aren't having that much fun once the battle gets large. Doing the same thing repeatedly as per your orders until you get orders to do another thing repeatedly is really effective, but for the repeaters who don't see the big picture and whose job is to stfu and not affect the strategy beyond executing the order it's not fun.

Doesn't basically the same thing happen in Raids?

There you'll normally see what is happening, can chat with raid's commanders about strategy, and there are few enough people doing the same stuff as you that your personal contribution really matters.

As the group expands it gets harder to know the big picture. Once it's too large group it gets impossible to know big picture for people who have to focus on their role. Officers/commanders and all the groups need to have their own chats or it would get flooded.

It feels good to be a part of something really really big, but it also gets boring more quickly because you're much smaller and much more limited part.

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

Vrika said:

Ancient_Exile said:

Vrika said:

Iselin said:

Ancient_Exile said:

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Correct. And that principle plays itself out all the time in the types of games that feature these types of battles.

You have the clueless ones with no leader who think it's all a functions of having more players than the other guys. When they go against a smaller but well led and experienced group they are quickly nothing but free kills.

All that is required from 90% of the participants is the ability to listen and follow orders. The other 10% in the command structure need to know the game well enough to come up with a plan, communicate that plan on a need to know basis (spies you know) and react to the unexpected when it happens.

I've played A LOT of this type of PvP with a lot of different people. It's no coincidence that the ones who are best at it usually have some military command experience. These battles simulate military engagements instead of gang fights in the ghetto or muggings like a lot of other types of PvP do. It's the only type of PvP I really enjoy.

The issue is that the majority who just listens to orders aren't having that much fun once the battle gets large. Doing the same thing repeatedly as per your orders until you get orders to do another thing repeatedly is really effective, but for the repeaters who don't see the big picture and whose job is to stfu and not affect the strategy beyond executing the order it's not fun.

Doesn't basically the same thing happen in Raids?

There you'll normally see what is happening, can chat with raid's commanders about strategy, and there are few enough people doing the same stuff as you that your personal contribution really matters.

As the group expands it gets harder to know the big picture. Once it's too large group it gets impossible to know big picture for people who have to focus on their role. Officers/commanders and all the groups need to have their own chats or it would get flooded.

It feels good to be a part of something really really big, but it also gets boring more quickly because you're much smaller and much more limited part.

Well, we don't need to participate in leisure activities in which we do not enjoy participating.

Iselin · April 2020

Vrika said:

Iselin said:

Ancient_Exile said:

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Correct. And that principle plays itself out all the time in the types of games that feature these types of battles.

You have the clueless ones with no leader who think it's all a functions of having more players than the other guys. When they go against a smaller but well led and experienced group they are quickly nothing but free kills.

All that is required from 90% of the participants is the ability to listen and follow orders. The other 10% in the command structure need to know the game well enough to come up with a plan, communicate that plan on a need to know basis (spies you know) and react to the unexpected when it happens.

I've played A LOT of this type of PvP with a lot of different people. It's no coincidence that the ones who are best at it usually have some military command experience. These battles simulate military engagements instead of gang fights in the ghetto or muggings like a lot of other types of PvP do. It's the only type of PvP I really enjoy.

The issue is that the majority who just listens to orders aren't having that much fun once the battle gets large. Doing the same thing repeatedly as per your orders until you get orders to do another thing repeatedly is really effective, but for the repeaters who don't see the big picture and whose job is to stfu and not affect the strategy beyond executing the order it's not fun.

For some people I'm sure it's not fun. The vast majority of game play in MMOs these days is solo game play and it's also no coincidence that the main story in most themeparks casts you in the role of the one and only special hero - never mind the fact that there are 10,000,000 others who are told the same

There's a lot of attraction to being the chosen one, the main man.

I can enjoy those large fights when the plan is executed well and we get the right outcome as a front line grunt just as much as a leader because it's a thing that emerged on the fly while I participated in it that is different enough from the other similar 1,000 times that I did it to be cool. PvE very rarely gives you that feeling of doing something emergent and unique.

Different strokes though.

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

Iselin said:

Vrika said:

Iselin said:

Ancient_Exile said:

Iselin said:

CU will never have "hundreds and hundreds." Their engine is being designed with large player battles in mind but its ability to handle more players on screen while maintaining a reasonable frame rate will be incremental not a revolution lol.

As to what these fights play like in the (mostly RvR) MMOs that have large battles there's no such thing as "individual actions have little impact." Large fights are nothing more than a whole shitpile of individual actions all in one spot.

The only difference is in the planning and coordinating all those individual actions so that they focus power on the right spot and respond rationally to enemy counters. In other words, "teamwork"... in an MMO of all things... who would have thought MMOs were about teamwork... oh, wait...

Calling it a "massive zerg clusterfuck" is very much an outsider's perspective. Someone watching on twitch with no clue what is going on inside that zerg. That or just the cliche horseshit from people whose idea of PvP is 1v1 "duel me bro" or sneak ganking the questing lowbee.

Armies or large groups of soldiers/combatants often require generals/captains/officers and sergeants to both give & take orders. Leading troops in battle is usually necessary. Armies don't generally tell their soldiers to just "go do w/e you want & try not to get killed".

Correct. And that principle plays itself out all the time in the types of games that feature these types of battles.

You have the clueless ones with no leader who think it's all a functions of having more players than the other guys. When they go against a smaller but well led and experienced group they are quickly nothing but free kills.

All that is required from 90% of the participants is the ability to listen and follow orders. The other 10% in the command structure need to know the game well enough to come up with a plan, communicate that plan on a need to know basis (spies you know) and react to the unexpected when it happens.

I've played A LOT of this type of PvP with a lot of different people. It's no coincidence that the ones who are best at it usually have some military command experience. These battles simulate military engagements instead of gang fights in the ghetto or muggings like a lot of other types of PvP do. It's the only type of PvP I really enjoy.

The issue is that the majority who just listens to orders aren't having that much fun once the battle gets large. Doing the same thing repeatedly as per your orders until you get orders to do another thing repeatedly is really effective, but for the repeaters who don't see the big picture and whose job is to stfu and not affect the strategy beyond executing the order it's not fun.

For some people I'm sure it's not fun. The vast majority of game play in MMOs these days is solo game play and it's also no coincidence that the main story in most themeparks casts you in the role of the one and only special hero - never mind the fact that there are 10,000,000 others who are told the same There's a lot of attraction to being the chosen one, the main man.

I can enjoy those large fights when the plan is executed well and we get the right outcome as a front line grunt just as much as a leader because it's a thing that emerged on the fly while I participated in it that is different enough from the other similar 1,000 times that I did it to be cool. PvE very rarely gives you that feeling of doing something emergent and unique.

Different strokes though.

I'm tired of being the chosen one. I'm tired of being directed on a particular path that every other player is also directed to take. Regardless of our individual choices along the way, we all end up at basically the same place in a Themepark MMORPG.

I want to choose my own path. I want to forge my own destiny and decide (or at least my have some influence over) my own fate (as in final outcome).

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fate

Ungood · April 2020

Gonna vote for "Clusterfuck"

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

"Mark Jacobs is an American game designer, programmer, author and businessman, and the former GM/VP/CEO of Mythic Entertainment, Inc. Best known as a lead designer of Dark Age of Camelot (2001) and Camelot Unchained (2019), he also created two early MUDs, Aradath and Dragon's Gate, serving as both the designer and programmer in addition to his duties as President/CEO. He founded A.U.S.I. (Adventures Unlimited Software Inc.) in 1983 and worked on a number of computer games for systems such as the Apple II. He is also a screenwriter, having penned a number of screenplays including one based on the game Imperator Online.

He is known for his strong position against "real money transfer", a.k.a. "gold selling".[1] Jacobs left EA in June 2009 after the company decided to merge BioWare with Mythic Entertainment.[2]

Biography

Jacobs attended Syracuse University and graduated, magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts degree. He then attended Georgetown University Law Center and graduated with a Juris Doctor. While at GULC, he started his first computer game company,[3] Adventures Unlimited Software Inc. in 1983. In the 1980s and until 1995, he created online games for both local networks and nationwide networks such as GEnie, AOL and Kesmai's Gamestorm network.

In 1995, he was the co-founder (along with Rob Denton), President and CEO of Mythic Entertainment, Inc.. He was involved in all Mythic Entertainment games since 1995, including their most successful product, the MMORPG Dark Age Of Camelot.[4]

In March 2011, he was the co-founder of City State Entertainment, along with Andrew Meggs, President of City State Entertainment.[5]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Jacobs_(game_designer)

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

DMKano said:

Ancient_Exile said:

"Mark Jacobs is an American game designer, programmer, author and businessman, and the former GM/VP/CEO of Mythic Entertainment, Inc. Best known as a lead designer of Dark Age of Camelot (2001) and Camelot Unchained (2019), he also created two early MUDs, Aradath and Dragon's Gate, serving as both the designer and programmer in addition to his duties as President/CEO. He founded A.U.S.I. (Adventures Unlimited Software Inc.) in 1983 and worked on a number of computer games for systems such as the Apple II. He is also a screenwriter, having penned a number of screenplays including one based on the game Imperator Online.

He is known for his strong position against "real money transfer", a.k.a. "gold selling".[1] Jacobs left EA in June 2009 after the company decided to merge BioWare with Mythic Entertainment.[2]

Biography

Jacobs attended Syracuse University and graduated, magna cum laude with a Bachelor of Arts degree. He then attended Georgetown University Law Center and graduated with a Juris Doctor. While at GULC, he started his first computer game company,[3] Adventures Unlimited Software Inc. in 1983. In the 1980s and until 1995, he created online games for both local networks and nationwide networks such as GEnie, AOL and Kesmai's Gamestorm network.

In 1995, he was the co-founder (along with Rob Denton), President and CEO of Mythic Entertainment, Inc.. He was involved in all Mythic Entertainment games since 1995, including their most successful product, the MMORPG Dark Age Of Camelot.[4]

In March 2011, he was the co-founder of City State Entertainment, along with Andrew Meggs, President of City State Entertainment.[5]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Jacobs_(game_designer)

Umm what is the point of this?

People can look up wikipedia - no need to copy and paste the entire thing.

Is it in the mmorpg.com ToS that I can't or shouldn't make it easier to read a Wikipedia article for people who don't like looking stuff up on their own or can't be bothered to click links? If it is, my bad, I'll delete it.

Ancient_Exile · April 2020

DMKano said:

Nope - not anymore.

I gave up on this farce of a game and not looking back

I never paid much attention to Camelot Unchained in the past.

MightyUnclean · April 2020

As far as my expectations, I'm not a terribly skilled player, so I actually like being lost in a zerg rather than one-on-one or small group PvP. I enjoyed that aspect of RvR in DAoC.

sumdumguy1 · April 2020

Not in any way am I looking forward to huge player battles.

Viper482 · April 2020

It will be a zerg clusterfuck....IF it ever releases, which I doubt. I backed it and the game is still very much pre-alpha, disregard anything MJ says about beta. It still doesn't have a full-time server up even lol. Pathetic cash grab of a game, MJ knew what he was doing the whole time. People were screaming for Daoc 2 for so long. Screw that guy.

Howdy, Stranger!

Are you looking forward to huge player battles in CU?

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Are you looking forward to huge player battles in CU?

Comments