Curse

EmperorTippy · Jun 20, 2005, 11:43 AM // 11:43

^^
I liked the other idea better as it kept this seperate from tombs and more stagey based than PUGs are right now.

Crimson Eyes · Jun 20, 2005, 11:48 AM // 11:48

cheers tippy

unclepodger · Jun 20, 2005, 12:10 PM // 12:10

All EXCELLENT ideas. I would REEEEALY like to see this.

Swarnt Brightstar · Jun 20, 2005, 12:14 PM // 12:14

I've been wanting to have more than 1hundred players/team but major lag-fest...

I like the idea BUT there should be more than 32 players.... honestly 32v32.... heck make it like 64v64 or even 100v100 that would look so awesome... especially if you could get it so your chars marched and were able to look so pimp if they could charge type o thing...

Also, I think that 100v100 should be broken up into 10 groups o 10 or 20 groups of 5(Methinks I did that right)

Ya this is off topic but it'd be cool if you could make alliances on PvE for more players kinda like in FFXI(which I want really bad)

funbun · Jun 20, 2005, 12:48 PM // 12:48

Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Open field to waring parties run at each other a clash.

Crimson Eyes · Jun 20, 2005, 08:47 PM // 20:47

^^ maybe even include player of the war or sumthing, i.e. give the best player in the arena some recognition in terms of effectiveness, not sure how this would be implimented though. not sure what the formula would be.

Aidan Gawain · Jun 20, 2005, 09:48 PM // 21:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ytrill

will never ever happen...Anet would have to change the entire GW skin for this...32 people in your party window? trying to scroll down every second to spam heal? Not likely.

This can be solved by have each 32-member team divided into 4 or more parties of up to 8 members. They would be allied, but not share status bars or radars writing and maybe have different dot colors on the map (e.g. party members = green, allied parties = blue). Of course, you could still cast spells, etc., (such as healing) on allied parties, just as you can cast them on guard NPCs and the like in PvE. In fact, that would be another reason for multiple parties - to prevent Heal Party and other skills that affect your entire party from being overpowered.

This divison would also help with the strategizing as each party could have a leader and the 4+ leaders could confer under a central commander (e.g. "Devona: Aidan, take your party south to ambush the enemies who are on their way to attack Mhenlo's party.").

Ancalagon06 · Jun 21, 2005, 04:04 AM // 04:04

Player of the War could be done fairly effectively like this, to use a healer as an example; the ammount of healing they did minus the amount of times the people they healed died. Healers with the highest score wins (this won't discriminate against smiting monks either, because if they don't heal, they won't fall into this category).

drowningfish999 · Jun 21, 2005, 04:17 AM // 04:17

Instead of having one large team, it could be something like a 4v4 teams of 8. That way its easier to heal since you only need to specifically watch your team, but its still a large scale battle. Their could be team chats and party chat, which speaks to your whole team and just your party of 8.

DrSLUGFly · Jun 21, 2005, 04:24 AM // 04:24

they could also leave the team divisions up to us, asigning colors to the broken teams (or specific PvP capes) and have it all manageable from within the guild hall. That way if a guild trained with a team of 16 a team of 8 and two teams of 4, but another team trained with 4 teams of 8, and a third team has no clue and just goes in as one team, each would have different strategies but each would be able to design their own style.

King of Fools · Jun 21, 2005, 04:55 AM // 04:55

last time this was suggested gaile said something about the tech not really being up to it. i think best they could do without lag is 16v16 until they get some more servers locations.

DrSLUGFly · Jun 21, 2005, 04:57 AM // 04:57

16 vs 16 would be cool (until they get some more server locations

)

goldfinger · Jun 21, 2005, 05:57 AM // 05:57

I agree, 16 vs 16 would be pretty cool, and I am sure they are considering this as everyone would undoubtedly enjoy it...

I also think it has the opportunity of being a good gold sink, costing ac ertain amountof money each go

Lt.Crumpet · Jun 22, 2005, 12:15 AM // 00:15

THIS WOULD BE SO FRIKIN AWSOME!!!! even 32v32 would totaly rock! but yes breaking it down like bf2 (which i am totaly addicted to) into squads would be the only way to do it. and also the chaos is the part that i like the best! with that chaos u can do the coolest things. can u imagine how much fun it would be to sneak around back of the enemy army and flanking them before they realize you hit em? THAT WOULD BE SO AWSOME!!!

speedtouch · Jun 22, 2005, 12:26 AM // 00:26

32 vs 32, 64 vs 64? WAY to much people.My internet connection slows down ALOT when just 30 people are fighting and im using DSL.I can't imagine the lagg if all the teams in HoH fought in the center all at once.

Lief · Jun 22, 2005, 12:48 AM // 00:48

Zerg battles dont interest me.

Eskimo Bob · Jun 22, 2005, 02:29 AM // 02:29

Thing about that, focus firing would drop someone no matter how many monks the other team had. There would be so many warriors that they would block each other.

Imagine a team of 20 air elementalists and the rest monks. All of them cats Orb on one guy. Bam he is dead without even a chance to be healed.

Ancalagon06 · Jun 23, 2005, 02:58 AM // 02:58

That's why in CS and in Battlefield everyone attacks the same guy, and kills them, and then moves onto the next one?

If you make maps huge, and the individual units spawn relatively far apart, the actual "EVERYONE TARGET THIS GUY" should be reduced to non existent, or make winning independent of killing all their men, or there's another dozen things to come up with.

Aidan Gawain · Jun 23, 2005, 04:45 AM // 04:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrSLUGFly

they could also leave the team divisions up to us, asigning colors to the broken teams (or specific PvP capes) and have it all manageable from within the guild hall. That way if a guild trained with a team of 16 a team of 8 and two teams of 4, but another team trained with 4 teams of 8, and a third team has no clue and just goes in as one team, each would have different strategies but each would be able to design their own style.

The problem with this is that parties of over 8 would make skills that effect the entire party too powerful.

Imagine a team of 32 energy storage El/Mo's with the following strategy:
4 El/Mo's - Take turns using Glyph of Lesser Energy -> Aegis (total cost=5 energy per 30 seconds) to keep a permanent Aegis on the team. While these skills are recharging, attack.
6 El/Mo's - Take turns using Martyr -> Purge Conditions (total cost=10 energy per 30 seconds) to remove all of the party's conditions every 5 seconds. While these skills are recharging, attack.
22 El/Mo's - Take turns using Glyph of Lesser Energy -> Heal Party (total cost=5 energy per 30 seconds) to heal the party for a total of up to 49pts per second. While Glyph is recharging, attack. If need be, cast additional Heal Party's for even more healing.

ADDED NOTE: To give you a perspective on this, this setup would be like an enchantment that said "While you maintain this enchantment, you gain health regeneration of 49, have a 50% chance to block attacks, and get your conditions purged every 5 seconds." except this would only cost half as much regen as a normal enchantment for everyone but the Martyrs (who would pay the normal maintainance cost). And no, Scourge Healing wouldn't help much, as hex removers could effectively counter it.

Also, if everyone used Heal Party enough to barely break even with regen, and the Martyrs used Glyph as often as possible, the party would have health regen of over 200pts per second.

Of course, if two such teams ever battled, it would be a race to see whose team was the first to have too many of its members fall asleep...

FINAL NOTE:
Even in general, since there are many skills that help your whole party but few (none?) that hurt your opponent's whole party, having huge parties would help defense a lot more than offense, greatly increasing the occurance of stalemates in which neither team can effectively harm the other. This would be exacerbated by the fact the the increased effectiveness of defense relative to offense would cause teams to have more protectors/healers and fewer damage-dealers (such as the entirely healing-centered team mentioned above).

Ancalagon06 · Jun 23, 2005, 06:40 AM // 06:40

that's why people have suggested that it be broken into teams of 8 that are just allied with each other (in other words, like the Ascalon Guards you run across from time to time). I understand what you are saying, and I think it's valid, but that doesn't mean there isn't a way around it, or that this shouldn't be done.