Curse

Dubby · May 13, 2005, 02:48 PM // 14:48

Big battles with hundreds of people are dumb. Know what would be nicer? Wars. A large battlefield, with a bloody objective for each side to complete that involves conflict with the opposing side. That still has tactics, since its invasion and siege.

A simple Attacker side and Defender side premise would work wonders. Especially if a structure like a Fort is used. Bliss!

Ramus · May 13, 2005, 02:52 PM // 14:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dubby

Big battles with hundreds of people are dumb. Know what would be nicer? Wars. A large battlefield, with a bloody objective for each side to complete that involves conflict with the opposing side. That still has tactics, since its invasion and siege.

A simple Attacker side and Defender side premise would work wonders. Especially if a structure like a Fort is used. Bliss!

We dont really need 100's of people. Even a 20 vs. 20 battle in a huge war battlefield would be great.

Vangor · May 13, 2005, 02:59 PM // 14:59

We just need something more along the lines of Assault maps from UT, they are getting there with the obelisks and objectives, however, I'd love to see these. Besides, wasn't there one done basically like Fort Kryta a while ago where you have to slay the captain or whatever with a few NPC guardsmen and 8v8.

Massive battles do lose strategy, and uniqueness of what makes Guild Wars its own, the fact that no matter the core of a class, such as a Warrior, it isn't exactly what you believe.

moses · May 13, 2005, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Ok lets go ahead and recap whats been argued about so far.

Epic Battles

Proposal
1. A huge battle between 200 vs 200 to 25 vs 25.
2. Styles of Battle:
Attack/Defend (Seige)
Free for All
PvE invasions/raids/seiges
3. Things to be added for Attack/Defend
Seige Towers/Ladders
Destroyable Gates/Walls
Catapults/Trebuchets (like in 2nd mission)
Pots of Boiling Oil
Buildings you can get on top of to shoot off of

Aruguements
1. Too much lag.
2. Too much unbalance because of AoE abilities.
3. Loss of Strategy.
4. Computers cant handle it.

Counter Arguement
1. Set aside districts or even a server in the future for this.
2. Still envoles strategy but a different style.
3. Would make AoE skills just more useful.
4. Guild WARS.

Other Ideas
1. Other events other then wars:
Scanvenger Hunt
Races
Salvage Contest
New Mission Race

Moses

P.S. If i forgot anything let me know, Ill add it.

EDIT: Changed the Battle Numbers
Mispelled Strategy

Valarian of Ascalon · May 13, 2005, 07:23 PM // 19:23

Anyone here ever play Tribes 2? That game could support up to 64vs64 tribal battles over a huge landscape involving fortresses, armoured vehicles and flying machines. And it all ran mint on the old winme-2000 platform with geforce 2 card specs. But! Like many people here have mentioned already it only worked well with tribe vs tribe with a direct chain of command and the majority of players used voice chat. Tribes 2 had built in voice chat support and it also had command structures where the general character could monitor the battlefield via cameras and sensors, this worked for that game since it was sci-fi, but how would that sort of thing transfer over into Guild Wars? Flag bearers, drummers? Medieval war was chaotic and messy with most battles being won as they still are now by the side that does not lose it's chain of command and maintains the ability to see that orders get to where they are needed. I like the idea of say 20vs20 or 32vs32 in a attacker/defender game but they would have to introduce a character class that can repair equipment for that to work. The problem I forsee is how do you fix structures that the siege equipment is destroying or in the case of the attacker how do you breach the fortress walls if all your equipment has been destroyed? Not that this couldn't be figured out since their are many quests already in game where siege equipment exists and walls/doors can be destroyed, the Shiverpeak maps and quests are a perfect example of this. Hold the bridge and all that, or take out the machines before they breach the walls. Just an idea, Valarian.

Valarian of Ascalon · May 13, 2005, 07:24 PM // 19:24

Stop the rampaging army in a set time limit?
or better yet bring down the rampaging dragon before it eats all the farmers!

Dubby · May 13, 2005, 07:28 PM // 19:28

We don't need enamorously large battles, 32v32 would be more then enough. Provided its -not- any kind of freeforall or just a big battle. The game would lose its charm. The other way to pump in tactics with such large numbers is with attack and defense of an actual structure, and outposts. A fort with a gate, walls, posts, places to guard, etc. would be ample for such combat, and still have plenty - if not more - tactics involved.

psst,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Valarian of Ascalon

or better yet bring down the rampaging dragon before it eats all the farmers!

I love that idea.

blythe · May 13, 2005, 07:31 PM // 19:31

We gotta throw in CTF...GOT TO; even if it was relatively small (8v8) Capture the Flag would be great.

Another thing I would like to see is flag capture points, sort of like Day of Defeat (HL mod). This could definitely be done with large amounts of people.

And, as a personal contest...who can kill the most Charr (multiple waves of enemies, for a single player only)

BChan · May 13, 2005, 07:57 PM // 19:57

honestly i think the reason they don't want that to be in place is cause necro primaries would be god...with all the people dying i would have a full bar of energy all the time.