<
>
 Thread (8 posts)
Recluse86  9/06/08 11:39:42 PM

Rank: 2/100 Rank: 2/100 Rank: 2/100 Rank: 2/100 Rank: 2/100

Novice Member

Joined: 1/23/07
Posts: 9

Am I right in thinking that the biggest fights you're going to have in WAR are 48 vs 48 battles? If so, this is really disappointing for me as I was expecting something similar to DAoC at it's peak where you could literally have 150+ players in and around a milegate/keep at any one time. Limitting a fight to 48 per side is going to make some battles feel less epic in scope for me...

I'm speaking from the perspective of someone who hasn't yet tried any of the large scale battles in WAR yet, so maybe 48 a side is more than enough? Feel free to chime in with your thoughts...

 
skeaser  9/06/08 11:41:53 PM

Rank: 31/100 Rank: 31/100 Rank: 31/100 Rank: 31/100 Rank: 31/100

Apprentice Member

Joined: 6/13/07
Posts: 477

48 v 48 is plenty enough to create anarchy. Even in scenarios with 10 players on each side, things get crazy, 48 would be pure chaos, and I like it.

 
Nevek  9/06/08 11:43:39 PM

Rank: 8/100 Rank: 8/100 Rank: 8/100 Rank: 8/100 Rank: 8/100

Novice Member

Joined: 11/30/07
Posts: 14

those numbers are only for the senerios...

open world pvp of course is as many as there is

 
Honeymoon69  9/06/08 11:44:53 PM

Rank: 10/100 Rank: 10/100 Rank: 10/100 Rank: 10/100 Rank: 10/100

Novice Member

Joined: 11/30/07
Posts: 143

large battle are always at EvC so get urself to warcamp and fly to EvC zone for some massive rvr but make sure u got money to fly there.

 
cukimunga  9/06/08 11:49:33 PM

Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100

Hard Core Member

Joined: 4/03/05
Posts: 1023

If you''re going to be crazy, you have to get paid for it or else you''re going to be locked up.

Well they did say in a interview they may go 72 vs. 72 they said it would depend on how big the areas are. Cuz it would be no  fun if you were all rubbing elbows with a bunch of people. But It would be cool to see even bigger battles if the area was big enough.

Playing Guild Wars. Waiting for Fallen Earth and SE new MMO.

ghettobooste  9/06/08 11:51:30 PM

Rank: 58/100 Rank: 58/100 Rank: 58/100 Rank: 58/100 Rank: 58/100

Advanced Member

Joined: 11/27/06
Posts: 249

Yeah dont get scenarios (battlegrounds instances) and RvR mixed up.  I was in a RvR battle today and there had to be over 100 people there from both sides.  I didn't lag at all either =D

 
Deto123  9/06/08 11:56:24 PM

Rank: 34/100 Rank: 34/100 Rank: 34/100 Rank: 34/100 Rank: 34/100

Apprentice Member

Joined: 5/02/08
Posts: 451

In open RVR you can have unlimited amount of people. In otherwords take a keep siege for example. You could in a literal sense have the whole sever in one battle. Will it happen most likely not, but it can. In keep sieges i ll be willing to bet especially at higher tiers you ll have 150-200 defending and same amount attacking. Just wait and see you ll love it :)

 
cukimunga  9/07/08 12:04:46 AM

Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100 Rank: 70/100

Hard Core Member

Joined: 4/03/05
Posts: 1023

If you''re going to be crazy, you have to get paid for it or else you''re going to be locked up.

Originally posted by Deto123

In open RVR you can have unlimited amount of people. In otherwords take a keep siege for example. You could in a literal sense have the whole sever in one battle. Will it happen most likely not, but it can. In keep sieges i ll be willing to bet especially at higher tiers you ll have 150-200 defending and same amount attacking. Just wait and see you ll love it :)

 

Yeah I kinda figured the RvR would have way more people.  200 vs 200 sounds epic.

Playing Guild Wars. Waiting for Fallen Earth and SE new MMO.