Howdy, Stranger!

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




Last Active
  • Caspien clarifies that there will be no support for 1000 player battles

    You might be thinking to yourself... Hey Slapshot why does this matter?

    Let me try to explain.

    CoE is a territory control PvP game where 6 kingdoms exist on a single continent, under those Kings are Duchys (ruled by Dukes), Counties (by Counts), Cities, Towns, and Villages (with Mayors).  Conflict between Kingdoms is supposed to be one reason that Kings will lose their Titles and lands.

    The sample continent is 18,432km^2.  The average Kingdom is going to be around 3,000km^2 (simply the total land divided by 6).

    Now we take the 100,000 target population per server and divide it by 18,432 to get ~5.43 people per km^2

    We take the 5.43 and multiply it by the size of a kingdom (3000) and get 16,290 per kingdom.  When two Kingdoms are at war we double that number to 32,580 characters.  

    What percentage of people can actually participate in the battles of this "war"?  Well let's give them the benefit of the doubt and say they can support 300 player battles.   That means that less than 1 percent of characters could actually be supported in such a "battle".

    Yes, there are people who just want to farm and craft.. undoubtedly!  But don't you think that significantly more than a fraction of a percent of the citizens of a kingdom at war would want to go fight in a major battle?

    So again... I refer back to The Way Forward thread where it is suggested that they lower their sights and start with some target of say 10,000 to start.   Build the game around that and then feel free to expand and grow once you are stable and can do it incrementally. 

    You get out of here with that crazy logic stuff.    

  • Caspien clarifies that there will be no support for 1000 player battles

    I do enjoy how he closed out this thread:

    "I'm not going to dislike your post. But I do wonder what benefit there is to coming to a game's website and posting your negative feedback about a decision that's already been made. While people may commiserate their concern, all that really does is stir up concern again for an issue that's already been laid to bed.

    You're clearly not going to change our minds with your post, so I don't entirely understand what the purpose of the post was. And if you suspect to be down-voted going in? Why waste the time on the post in the first place? A downvote means people feel you're not contributing to the community.

    In any case, I'm closing this thread. Your questions/concerns have been addressed, and there's no reason for people to further come to our defense. We made a decision we're happy with, and continue to feel it was the best long-term decision for us and for the players."


    I went from being a supporter of CoE, to a skeptic that it would ever launch, to now I"m not so sure if it should ever come out.    Statements like this from the owner.....

    In the end, there's a lot of work to do to optimize CoE, but the hardest optimization problems aren't solved through horizontal scale-out or even sub-dividing the world into smaller and smaller chunks. It's solved through understanding of the game mechanics and experience optimizing client engine code like UE4 - something we have experience with.


    ...are pretty laughable from the company that has had to push their anticipated release to the right by over a year, has had to do layoffs, is struggling to find financial support of a publisher (after flip-flopping on the position of even getting a publisher) and finally sending out supporters of the game to try and shut down any negative reviews on the game.

    “So what I was discussing on Discord the other day was for you guys, the community, to shut down such behavior. We can’t be everywhere at once, nor does it look good for us to try and discourage such behavior. But we can encourage you guys to shut down such behavior. Remind people that it’s perfectly fine to be skeptical.. but to try and spread the skepticism is bad.”


    There are games already out there that have several hundred people engaged in combat at one time (Archeage, Revelation Online).   I think it would have been less damaging if CoE had said "We are aiming at a cap of XXX players in simultaneous combat"

  • Developer seems frustrated that publishers don't understand CoE's appeal

    Mikeha said:
    Even Trion wont touch it?  ;)

    Hell not even EA will touch it?

    The game is so unfinished it seems ready for a full marketing launch from EA