All Posts by Jetrpg

Originally posted by krackajap

Originally posted by Jetrpg

 

Have you ever seen army tactics using melee weapons , there is much standing around.

 

1v1 ok whatever, but the real application of weapons is in armies, and these move slow and often in simple and semi-complex formations and movements.

If this game is supposted to repeasent guild forces verse other then strafing should be largely out... however, it more small group based and we know this.

So 1 v 1 it all ya want folks.

Cause sieging is the only form of PvP in AoC.  It's not like this game has any sort of world PvP where people would mostly find themselves solo.

Originally, I thought and AoC was sold as being some larger pvp game. When we pretty much now know its small scale pvp , with a lot of ganking. Gratz, On making me have to state this word for word so that you may understand my point. Even the combat is setup to support small scale pvp.

Originally posted by bvrzvm

Does that mean that my kickass veteran 2005 account is deleted?

If so, Funcom can eat shit.

Mythic did this to me Twice... However, i still have vet status. It just sad that I can't flex my day one sign-up.

Originally posted by Artermis

hm so correct me if im wrong (its early monday morning :P), if i arrange to meet my guildies in a particular town, we cant? unless we are very lucky to hit the same instance?

In most games like that group mate will show up in the same instance.

<modedit>

Some people have not reported this, however, bladin. Thus not "anyone" who has played that beta would say this. Maybe many, but not "anyone".

Does unplayable mean just video lag? No im sorry it could mean many more things. Pvp content, character development , STABILITY which "anyone" who has played the beta regardless of system can tell has been an issue (YES i am being sarcastic), and other reason are all valid reason why this person could find AoC "unplayable". However, your statements have been ignorant of these other possible reasons for that post.

However, as i said it is troll, but it is not ignorance. (Unless you are some sort of super human that can read peoples minds , who you don't even know, from across the internet).

I think shadowbane is "unplayable" not becuase it crashes or lags too bad, but becuase it too hard to control and the entire interface just makes it unplayable to me. Believe me i have tried. 

For that poster playable may just very well be a rather polished game, which i believe i can say with some agreement that AoC still has quite a lot of polished left to go. Maybe that is not it but ill pass assuming to know everything, and just play it safe and stick with theres no way for anyoen but that poster to know ... unless we ask him (What a grand idea).

So Ackbar why did you make that statement?

Originally posted by Portrich

I am the guild leader of In Motion, who came out to Valdeholm when one of my members, Farsente, received /oocs and /tells from the OP (I will not say his character name) claiming he was 'macro stealthing a named near them'.

I came to zone, and observed Farsente 5-boxing his characters in the Pit, and saw no signs of hacking, warping, or, as the OP had claimed in /ooc and /tell, a 19-sec change in logs.  ? still new on that one.

More guildmembers, and a character not from our guild who was asked to observe as a 3rd party, came out.

Said OP was verbally abusive to all within zone as far as /tell, /ooc, and /say was concerned.

Several /report and /petitions were sent, and if you were banned, it was due to your actions and yours alone.  GMs CANNOT modify the server logs, and they investigated every toon they receive a /report on, so if the accused had been killing your mob, he would have been at the least suspended.

Make your feeble accusations, but be it known, the members that were /reported on were investigated, and if something, even minor, would have occured, they would have been suspended (and I would have kicked them summarily out of the guild).

Feel free to take any accusations of GM favoritism to Rashere, Ngreth, Nodilyn, etc.  If you were banned, it was for your actions.  Sony, while not always being fast or entirely accurate, does not permanently ban folks falsely.  If this had been your first offense, you would have been suspended, not banned, per the SOE rules (see Rashere's posts on the forums).

 

I'm more than happy to post my /log of what I had (granted, I am sure claims of me changing them would appear), but in the end, you were banned for violations to the EULA, and if it's a permanent ban, enjoy WoW.  If not permanent, perhaps you will be more respectful to members of the server if you return.

Sincerely,

Portrich

Guild Leader, In Motion

PS. This post is linked to EQLive forums for SOE review if needed.

 

 

Epic fail

Originally posted by Talemire

 

Originally posted by Bladin

I disagree.

If this game changes into circle strafing idiocy it'd be terrible.

 

Starfing idiocy is an oxymoron if I've ever heard one. Have you ever seen sword fighters fight? Whether it's fencing or arena dueling, people move around. They do not stand in one place and swing their sword like there's no tomorrow. It's strategy to get at your enemy from a certain angle. I'm assuming (only assuming) you play a caster class.

Here's how I see issues like this (take this to heart): If someone is willing to think the extra step to make gameplay (or anything in that matter) more efficient, it's your job to 1 up him and create a counterstyle more efficient for you. That's a (one) definition of a champion.

1v1 ok whatever, but the real application of weapons is in armies, and these move slow and often in simple and semi-complex formations and movements.

If this game is supposted to repeasent guild forces verse other then strafing should be largely out... however, it more small group based and we know this.

So 1 v 1 it all ya want folks.

Originally posted by _Kyle_

Tunnel zoneing is dated technology because it forces the developers to degrade the game down substantially. Even straight down to core mechanics such as combat.

You're gaining more then just improve graphics. Yes zoneing is some what annoying, but the trade off is a beautiful world to explore and for more innovative game mechanics.

You people seam to have made up your minds on the game. If you can't accept it. Then LEAVE and do us all a favor already by shutting up.

Originally posted by dracomun

I played on palomides and TBh we rarely saw more then 48X48 at one keep unless it was a relic raid, i guess i just have a lot of wishful thinking tho b/c the more mmo's i play the worse they seem to get, early uo was my favorite followed by ac then daoc and nothing worth mentioning since

Yeah ... i played on like 3 servers before any merdges i remeber 100-600 people seiges  (a few were more than this but it hit the servers so bad) , sorry that you played at 5 am eastern.

Tho i will say palomides was a bit under pop'ed , but i had a 50 decked minstrel there.

Originally posted by krackajap
QFT, If AoC was as revolutionary as is claimed, they would have developed a way to create the illusion of a seamless world better than what currently exists.  This was a design choice they made. I will accept it and play despite it, but that doesn't mean I have to like it.  To claim that load screen are better than a "seamless" world is just plain stupid. 

QFT

Originally posted by TrunksZ

Whats the difference betwen windows vista 32bit and 64bit, could someone tell me ? because I have 32bit and if the 64 bit will increase my computer performance I will get it.

Ok if you have 3 GB or less of ram 64-bit will not help you at all and possibly slow your system down the ever smallest tad. (Really, there is no reason not to use 64 bit).

32 biut allows the max of 3 GB of ram , 64 max of 16 terabytes of ram. however i believe 8 gb is the max supported via common motherboard atm.

So there ya have it unless you want to add ram or whatnot, no need to go to 64bit. (If the upgrade is free it can't hurt you , it will not help ya tho).

Unless you buy more ram , which will not help most games anyway.

Originally posted by demented669

i played hellgate london in dx9 and 10 and my fps never droped and crysis same so what game do you say fps take a hit over dx10 ? and as for xp better then vista for game how so i am having fun times with vista now that most games are made to run it with no bugs or less anyway. just want to know where you got your info, and run a game in dx9 and then in 10 and tell me you think 9 looks better ...come on have you ever even tryed dx10 ? or are you just a vista hater >>?<<

Vista does very well with multi-media applications, but is in no way as good for games.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/xp-vs-vista,1531-4.html

http://www.simhq.com/_technology2/technology_110d.html

http://enthusiast.hardocp.com/article.html?art=MTMzNCwyLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdA==

For the record.

1)

For most of the beta time dx10 was enabled in AoC (At least thats is funcom's position). However, Funcom disabled the ability to use Dx10, because honestly it was lagging people far to bad. (Some bad code some where or something, who knows i don't).

They turned it off late in the beta.

2)

Windows XP out preforms windows Vista when it comes to games. (In FPS) .

DX 10 LOWERS your FPS over dx9.

DX10 does look better than dx9, however, to what degree is individually disputed. Personally atm for modern graphic engines dx10 doesn't do anything for me.

3)

Funcom will support dx10 , so no massive worries here.

4)

This thread and others like it show how sad many of mmo'ers and forum goers are. Often misinformed, yet ready to testify incorrectly.

Because i can click a dx10 button that means i have it...

Because i built a NEW Computer with vista and it was faster than my older one with XP means Vista is faster ...

Because Funcom said that their combat would be revolutionary ... Oh darn we already know this ones not true.

I mean I don't know what the issue is, are people just to lazy to look up the reality of an situation? Are people to bias to look for the true? What is it that keeps us as humans in the dark, its almost like we purposefully seek to avoid the truth, because knowing the truth would cause us to what THINK ?

Sorry for the rant but this stuff always does get me thinking.

Originally posted by WiccanCircle

 

Originally posted by sandgrown

...is undeniably making a lot of gamers think twice . does funcom need to offer a free trial sometime over the course of the summer ?

Not a chance.

 

At 75 votes it is a dead tie for Yes/No... guess what, most people that voted 'Yes' are likely people that I would prefer not to be in the game in the first place. 

The yes'rs are likely people that -

A)  Are little children that can't get legally in to the game anyhow.

B)  Are Cheap and just want things handed to them while other people pay the bill.

C)  Are people that can't afford to spend a mere $50 on a toy and therefore shouldn't be playing with toys anyhow!

D) etc.

Regardless your computer system it is only $50.  If this is even a consideration in your budget you should NEVER be playing games.

If you can't afford to pay, don't want to pay or are just a beggar then please, stay far away from Age of Conan.  The rest of the population will be far better off with you someplace else. 

 

So . . .

A) Not a little child

B) Yes wow great point, maybe I , don't want to pay $50 for a game that maybe junk (oh and if $50 is not much to you gratz on being , a Rich ass. You know not all of us are. Or, gratz on having no concept of money).

C) It is not if a person CAN spend $50 but if it is worth spending $50 , See My answer B for things you can do to fix your faulty thought processes.

D) ETc. What If your not a AoC fanboi then F you? I mean really some of us are not AoC fanbois and its sad that all you want in your game is AOC fanbois, talk about being elitist.

"If you can't afford to pay, don't want to pay or are just a beggar then please, stay far away from Age of Conan.  The rest of the population will be far better off with you someplace else. "

Thank for your words of unwisdom.

If i had a child that thought this way, I would have to spank them for being an ass.

I was going to try both but from what i have seen of AOC im goinna need to be able to pick it up for $30 or less or trial it before I am willing to pay $40+

I probly will not buy this game @ $50-40  , ill wait , unless i could do a trial.

Originally posted by bobtheblob

Just read a preview in this months Pc Gamer UK and here are a few intersting lines: "Your first 10 minutes in WAr are abysmal. And thats a shame, because there's real potential here. Pur premade character was dumped beside a massive boat on a drab island. There are buzzing fairies ahead, elevn sailors to your left and a path to the right. In front a quest master :" Kill four fairies, Kill six sailors. Go and meet my friend"

Welcome to the grind, stay here forever"

The article then goes on the complain about only having two skills at the start making the combat boring!

However the rest of the article is generally positive, mainly explaining why you should play WAR and so on.

However it makes me wonder what the previewer was looking for when he was preveiwing an mmo?! Anyways what do you guys think of what i have quoted? Does not concern me too much its what i expect from an mmo!

Ever heard of Wow, DAOC, EQ, PS for freak sakes. Pretty much starting zone, he doesn't say the game was not fun for reason related to game play but what, i only have like two moves to start with.... And it is called character development.

He is totally , missing that the "grind" in this game really does help your side defeat the other side. Makign it not totally arbitrary.

That being said , the first quests should be hella fun and anyoen not saying so is misguided i believe.

The first quest should be intensive etc. I think what DAOC has now, but for war it should be a pvp or hostial npc area where you have to fight or RUN through to get to safty of a boat or wagon, Arc, etc that takes you to the starting areas, this would really get people invloved in not only the game but defeating their mortal enemies.

That and abbaba makes a good point, sometimes its better to underwhelm new players than overwhelm them. Crazy dynamic quests off the bat... possibly confusing. (I disagree but im an experienced gameplayer, and well many are not).

Originally posted by Praxus

There's issues with SLI. Try with one card. I run it quite smoothly on HIGH with a 4 ghz e8400 and a 8800GT.

Average 35 fps. If I remove environmental shadows, its 50+ fps.

This is a joke right? I mean you just said you NEED THE BEST GAMING RIG OUT THERE TO PLAY THE GAME AT 35 FPS.

If this was not a joke , you sir have just confirmed that the game is all but unplayable for 90% of mmor'ers and gamers out there. IF it was a joke then its pretty funny.

the Q6600 it a higher level cpu than the e8400, but slower per core (quad vs duo). ATm with my q6600 (8800gts 512 video card) i can run ,  4 instances of wow (max settings, native 1600x 1050 rez) with 60-90 fps. CS:S @ 240-300(max) fps, highest settings lotro with no lag at all, bioshock high (i forget the fps it was high tho), eve in battles at 120-200. All of that and ... 35 fps in AoC? i mean come on. I don't know if this guy is right but the graphics are not that good for it to be takign so many resources... hopefully they will optimize better, but most of it will have to be after release.

 Now i am not saying that is true , i am just responding to Praxus here.

Honestly i think AoC looks a ton like a redone daoc and this does make me want to try it out. (liek the characters and movement , fighting etc)

I am currently trying this game agian and i just can't get into it. 

DAOC best siege and pvp ever.

WAR upcoming game will have it...

Shadow bane has it , i like class creation g, but graphixs are a tad sad, and character control is god awful. (SB is free now, i like druids and vamp locks).

In a way planetside has seige.

AOC has siege but when you can seige is limited.

Originally posted by Creasian

 

Originally posted by David_Wolfpa

I'm thinking about upgrading to 4gb of RAM, at the moment i've got 2gb and I think they might be overclocked, I bought the PC overclocked already a while ago and can't really remember if it mentioned the RAM being overclocked or not..

What i'm wondering about is if I buy some more memory can I just stick it in there if the 2x1gb sticks thats in there already are overclocked? will it be alright running 2 sticks as overclocked and 2 as not or would I need to overclock my new memory I bought too?

Any help would be vm appreciated

 

 

Some sticks oc better than others.  I had 2gb of xms2 DDR2-800 ram at 490mhz for 2 weeks.  That would be like DDR2-980.  I clocked it back down however.. but regardless it really depends on the ram.

Generally you never want to add something on a oc'ed system.  You want to have everything reverted to stock and then do it to help with any potential errors you might have. 

Also, you should check to make sure that the NEW ram is rated at the same voltages you got your current set at.  Most times people will add voltages to their ram to get a OC and keep the timings tighter. 

It is possible, and most chances are you wont have a issue.  However nothing is certain, and it is best to do it right when adding more ram if you got your current set oc'ed. 

 

One other factor with 4 gigs of ram and all oc'ed is the strain on your MCH.  The northbridge can become hot if you put too much strain on it, or the ram might become unstable and give you instability.  4 sticks is harder to oc and keep the timings tight and not strain the northbridge than 2 sticks.  Often adding +1 to the mch can help this, depending on high much the oc is.

However.. generally.. SPEED is higher priority than timings.  So having to loosen timings to achieve a higher stable oc on the ram will benefit you more.  Well.. generally..

QFT

Originally posted by Bispberg

....  Having over 2GB is a waste. 

So having 150% more ram over 2 GB (IE 3 GB) Is a waste? How do you figure this?

I ran 4 Wow clients (PK i know wtf so what right , they were all max settings) But it took up 2 GB of memory (While you still have virtural memory why ask it to run slower) And if your doing any encoding etc, the 50% extra ram will help you.

...

Also looking at the CL5, CL4, CL3 or whatever they say it's the fastest, it doesn't matter at all, nothing you will notice anyway.

Yes it does, it does effect FPS. Just it really limits how much you can oc the ram, however, a sticks CAS ratings are usually a good indicator of how well it OCs.

Overclocking I'd say I do not recommend as it decreased the lifetime of your computer components.

I do Heat reduces the lifetime of your parts, and voltage (which causes the heat and thus oen reason as well as the increased flow of electrons ... but this flows effect other than heat is minimal). Because of this OC to your hearts content. I have my cpu (q6600) at 3.2 up from 2.4 GHz, NO voltage bump , and heat is up 3 C under load and idel.  Where as the hotest my CPU hits is 50 C (my highs temp core) (IE its totally fine, in-fact its cool).

 

...

least two you could install two OS's, one vista for example that support 4GB

Don't do this to run faster tho , as vista (its the 64 bit , xp 64 bit can do this also but stay away from xp 64). Anyway, don't boot vista to run faster because you can use more ram as vista runs slower than XP; more so when talking about games. Really atm 8 GB is only needed for encoding and a few programs that can use it. 4 Gb is not bad, and #gb is all you'll ever need atm. Still 2 GB is currently well enough for most things, But 3Gb gives ya some lee-way.