Age of Conan

Originally posted by whisperwynd

  I had an epic breakfast once of 5 waffles and 5 pancakes. The  pancakes had more syrup, but the waffles won by filling me up with more satisfaction.

 My eyes wanted a larger battle, but my stomach couldn't handle it.

rofl. win.

I just Pre-ordered, came here and this was the firs post I read. Well not all of it. Anyway this if freaking awesome.

Most poeple used to older MMORPGS think they need huge numbers cause there isnt much real tactic. Its all zerg. You need numbers to due attrition. In Conan you could easily see several highly skill player running thru crowds like Leonidas or Achilles. Cutting down everyone he came across with his quick reflexes and skill.

This is gonna be something really special. Something game will be held up to in judging greatnees. Only  5 days to go.

48vs48 is actually disappointed. But I am not surprised. I have always said that high graphic demand does not go well with large scale battle. In this case, it's not the server that has problem, it's the client side that will choke.

Still, Lineage 2 can handle 1000 people in a castle siege just fine. No problem at all. Most castle siege battles in Lineage 2 are from 600 - 1000 people fighting, why cant AoC handle at least 200?

With the new siege battle comming in WoW, with tanks and air support, bombing, air to air and surface to air fighting, the battle just open up a whole new level, now if they have naval based  which I don't think it's hard to implement using the vehicle system then WoW battle is completed.

Come on AoC, try a little harder.

If you ever played EVE and got involved in an "epic" space battle you'll know these massive battles never really work. It turns into a frustrating slide show of a lagfest where you hear you're dead over vent then see it 20 mins later.

I've been playing Battlefield for the last year instead of MMORPGs, the largest is a 64 player map. The side with the best organization always wins. Good squad leaders with members that follow orders + good commander = victory 99.9% of the time, unless the enemy does the same then it's a real good fight win or lose.

AoC having 96 players for a siege is just fine, I get decent performance and the side that is most organized along the lines of Battlefield wins. Although here you have greater differences in skill so maybe you'll get the odd skilled warrior leading the charge. If you had 500 per battle most players wouldn't even see the battle, I've never participated in a massive battle of 100 vs 100 or more where the majority didn't lag out and only witness a slide show.

Originally posted by Agricola1

If you ever played EVE and got involved in an "epic" space battle you'll know these massive battles never really work. It turns into a frustrating slide show of a lagfest where you hear you're dead over vent then see it 20 mins later.

I've been playing Battlefield for the last year instead of MMORPGs, the largest is a 64 player map. The side with the best organization always wins. Good squad leaders with members that follow orders + good commander = victory 99.9% of the time, unless the enemy does the same then it's a real good fight win or lose.

AoC having 96 players for a siege is just fine, I get decent performance and the side that is most organized along the lines of Battlefield wins. Although here you have greater differences in skill so maybe you'll get the odd skilled warrior leading the charge. If you had 500 per battle most players wouldn't even see the battle, I've never participated in a massive battle of 100 vs 100 or more where the majority didn't lag out and only witness a slide show.

Squad based battle is not WAR. When thinking about castle siege, I think WAR. Great battle is always chaotic, even the most organized one. Come on, 48 people trying to take down a castle with 2 layers of wall? What about those siege weapon? they gonna run them self? or just have one person push it? That's a freaking toy, not siege weapon.

Do you realize how funny it is when you stand on your wall and you see 48 people running up? You gonna need 48 freaking Titans. Not even 48 Conans can siege a castle with 2 layers of fortified walls.

---

Originally posted by DAS1337

---

Originally posted by Arkane_A

Just speaking of DAoC the only time it was slideshow like was when it got over 500ish people for me. Seeing battles of 100-300 was never a problem for my computer and I didn't have a fantastic computer back then.

---

You've never seen 500 people in the same area. I played that game when it was at it's prime on one of the highest populated servers.. and I was in a guild that was in the top 3 on the entire server in PvP. I NEVER saw 500 people.. at relic raids, you might get 200 or so.. 300 was a rarity and I've never seen that first hand. On most servers early on, everyone fought in Hibernia.. even in the most hectic times, you'd only see 50v50.. come on dude.

I'm calling bullshit on that one man.

Maybe you had a better computer than me, but I know I could solo and group without getting slowdown.. so it was good enough for casual play. All I know is that when it got above 100 people on the same screen or vicinity, it started getting choppy..

---

It happened. Just not on the low population servers I guess. On the RP server I played in we regularly had 300 folks slamming into each other.

So in a 70 man guild 22 will suck di*k at every siege. HAAHHAHAHA cant stop laughing. Do the catapults count as siege members? HAHAHAHAHAHA incompetence at its finest, and i hoped this game would work......

Shadowbane can withstand more than a 100 people at a siege and that game is 7 years old

On DAOC you people saying you had 300 or 500 people fighting in the same small area have lost your freakin' minds.

I played DAOC for years, and this is simply ridiculous and total bull shit.

I had a top of the line computer in my DAOC days and seeing 50 people in the same area fighting was total chaos and low fps with flashes of spells and dots going off everywhere. 50 players with all the pets and Bone Dancers with all their pets and stuff was absolutely nuts. If 300 people were in the same area, you couldn't even see nothing but players and pets stacked on top of each other as far as you could see in every direction. That is absurd.

500 people all fighting in the same small area where you could see almost everyone (500 other players) by simply rotating your view 360 degrees eh?

Ridiculous. Hell, if you're gonna sit here and just make up shit, why not just spat off that DAoC had MILLIONS of players all fighting in one small area and it was still really smooth and you had a low end computer too? I mean that wouldn't really be any sillier then what you are claiming to be true.

And how did you know it was 300 or 500 players in one small area by the way? Did you count somehow count them? ...What you mean to say it it "SEEMED" like hundreds of players all fighting in a small area. The TRUTH is that forty of fifty players fighting was total chaos in DAoC and certainly SEEMED like hundreds of players.

I'm not gonna sit here and say that there wasn't GIGANTIC player battles in DAoC. There was, and when it ran smooth, it was insane fun! But let's not get totally ridiculous about the numbers of players that were in one small area now.

- Zaxx

Originally posted by Thachsanh

 

Originally posted by Agricola1

If you ever played EVE and got involved in an "epic" space battle you'll know these massive battles never really work. It turns into a frustrating slide show of a lagfest where you hear you're dead over vent then see it 20 mins later.

I've been playing Battlefield for the last year instead of MMORPGs, the largest is a 64 player map. The side with the best organization always wins. Good squad leaders with members that follow orders + good commander = victory 99.9% of the time, unless the enemy does the same then it's a real good fight win or lose.

AoC having 96 players for a siege is just fine, I get decent performance and the side that is most organized along the lines of Battlefield wins. Although here you have greater differences in skill so maybe you'll get the odd skilled warrior leading the charge. If you had 500 per battle most players wouldn't even see the battle, I've never participated in a massive battle of 100 vs 100 or more where the majority didn't lag out and only witness a slide show.

You have never been in a Lineage 2 siege with 1000 people. The feeling is not the same. If you have never been in one, then you can't understand the feeling.

 

Squad based battle is not WAR. When thinking about castle siege, I think WAR. Great battle is always chaotic, even the most organized one. Come on, 48 people trying to take down a castle with 2 layers of wall? What about those siege weapon? they gonna run them self? or just have one person push it? That's a freaking toy, not siege weapon.

Do you realize how funny it is when you stand on your wall and you see 48 people running up? You gonna need 48 freaking Titans. Not even 48 Conans can siege a castle with 2 layers of fortified walls.