Originally posted by Teala

Originally posted by Tobias3

 Of course, M&B is easily the best combat system in ANY medieval game. Especially in the Warband beta. However, it's all a bit too much for being online, too many calculations. The closest you're gonna get is Darkfall. 

 

Tobias, I have played Warband with 40+ people and 160 bots on one server for a siege test.  Some players were from Europe and some from the US.   It was amazingly smooth and most pings averaged between 10 and 130.   That in itself shows that FPS type melee combat works online very well.   I think TaleWorlds combat system could easily be ported to even a larger scale full blown MMORPG and work just as well.     

problem with using bots those are server-side entities. So, a bot doesn't have to replicate data to the server like a real client would.

I think it would've been more accurate if they had access to 160 clients that could run a bot clientside- and replicate the packets to the server. You know- like how hackers / cheaters macro their characters to servers in MMOs

That is the only way to simulate a client properly.

By having 160 bots, you are only testing server side CPU strain if you follow- its not a valid network sim sadly

edit- I'm going to see bout getting access to this warband. M&B online would be sweeeeetttt

Yeah OP if you're not into PVP you're totally screwed then. Not one MMO I've ever seen has dynamic PVE.

One of the other posters suggested elder scrolls which is a good suggestion. I'd recommend Neverwinter Nights 2 as well. Plenty of player run servers with cool ideas and GMs

Originally posted by otter3370

I understand what you're saying.  I just don't see how what you're describing is a game.  You're talking about another reality parallel to our own or something.  It sounds like you're describing an amped up Sims game, where you're living a simulated unpredictable life.  Maybe a single player game will come out that allows you that kind of freedom, but I don't see how feasible it is for an mmorpg to have the features you describe.  Many thousands of players being able to affect an ever changing gameworld to the extent you describe would seem to be impossible at least with present technology.   And you mentioned in another thread that such a game was being made?

I took your first post as being a person that's simply bored or burned out on the genre but I think you were just talking about what your dream mmorpg would be like.  And it sounded cool.  I'd try it.

 

Bioware alluded to this exact same reasoning. They didnt sit around and think bout new ways to make cool stuff happen. They simply just gave up and follow status quo :(

Alas, there are ways to make a dynamic world work. I will mention the simplest and most basic way. We all pretty much know it but never gave it much thought

GMs

You know, in PnP a GM has the power to make dynamic things happen. They can be an NPC. they can be a raid boss.

How bout GMs earn the money we pay them? Go possess some NPC and create some dynamic situation like attack the town. Kill some noobs. Drop some great loot when you die

GMs. What happened? This word used to mean something! Now they just talk like bots in modern mmo.

Originally posted by Bookkeeper

MMOs talk about the grand adventure, but they give you the same day over and over again.  You kill the same things over and over.  Everything stays in the same place, every day is the same as yesterday.  The same guy hands out the same lame quest, to everyone, everyday.  Everybody does the same lame quests.  Time has no meaning, players have no impact.  The MMO genre will continue to stagnate and bore the game community until some developer steps up and makes a changing living world.  One where time moves forward and tomorrow is different than today. 

This guy has much wisdom. I can feel the force is strong within this one :)

Yep, it made me a sad puppy when I saw Bioware talking bout SW:TOR in a video. They were saying how they cannot allow players to impact the world. So basically they have all these fake little instances to trick noobs into thinking they accomplished something

dont get me wrong i will probably still try out the game. And I am going to laugh when I see them do this.....

At least games like EVE / Darkfall allow you to impact  the world through your PVP actions. You can build and destroy other player's things.

Originally posted by CactusmanX

Originally posted by LynxJSA

 

....

You left a part out, "mainly to make looting not a massive devistating loss items are usually rather trivial, I mean you usually stockpile them in your bank, which I don't really like because I rather like unique and special items"  I take no issue with the storage space but that in loot based games items are rather unimportant, whereas I like to customize items and such, which is what I mean my unique gear, the two playing styles don't mix really well, unless you seperate loot and customization in some way.

 

.....

 

 

Actually if you think bout it- having the uniqueness you crave defeats tactical transparency anyway. If you allow players to decorate their armor to such an extent other players cannot tell if they have on plate or light armor- then you have just disabled players ability plan how to deal with you. So for a PVP game, tactical transparency is so key.

In EVE Online, players actually gather intel on enemy fleet makeup and broadcast ship types in chat. If players cannot recognize your ship due to fancy decorations, then that confuses them a bit. In the case of EVE the devs could still display the ship name. But imagine if it was a medieval sort of game like the other MMOs. Now I have no way to tell what type of armor you have on possibly- and that leads to some confusion

Anyway in the case of EVE you'd be surprised how much pride folks take into their avatar portraits. I know I paid extra to redesign my portrait. When/if Ambulation (walking avatar expansion) ever comes out, you'll be able to spend more time and effort decorating your avatar.

So the styles can mix. But like I pointed out, you normally do not want players to make their armor and weapons look too unique. You want for players to be able to recognize these items on sight. Instead, you let them decorate their faces and houses.

I hate to say this but to drive this point home think about World of Warcraft. In my time, the Hand of Ragnaros was the ultimate weapon. It could insta-pwn ya. So if you ever saw a Warrior charging at ya with it- you just ran your butt off. So yeah- allowing players to make weapons of war look different can be bad. Very cool idea but will cause massive chaos.

Originally posted by CactusmanX

Originally posted by LynxJSA

 ...

Actually I am not applying gear dependent mechanics to a looting game.  I know gear isn't as big a deal as in loot dependent games but it isn't the same as taking someones piece in chess.  Losing a piece in chess is like losing health, it is the condition for loss, taking someone elses items is something you do after you already beat them, it inflicts longer term setbacks to people, where as losing a chess piece has no effect beyond the scope of the match.  Having your ship blown up in Eve is a death penalty and not the same as looting.

I could see how they were the same if after winning a game of chess you kept your opponent's chess set and made them buy a new one.  So I see it as mean, because even though the game allows it, it is still an optional action you do to benefit at anothers expense, meaning the mechanics do not force you to steal peoples items.   So by looting them you are directly responsible for setting the other player back by time, items and money.  Since I don't like to lose time, money or items I don't inflict it upon others either.

 ....

That ship has some expensive gear on it. If you are familiar with EVE, you can see that a good number of the ships killed had decent gear on them. Gear is made to be used and expected to be lost. It's a very different design from gear-dependent MMOs where the game is built to instill a need and attachment to one's gear. With the hoops one has to jump through in gear-dependent MMOs, it's understandable that they would be very upset if they ever lost a single piece of it.

 I know that but it still isn't something most people can afford to do.  It seems counter productive to try and get really nice things if I probably can't afford to replace them when I get looted.

 

 

Shortened the post a bit.

You say you think it is 'mean' to destroy another player's possessions.

But you are not thinking of EVE as an RTS game are you or as a military simulation?

Think bout it- when there is risk/loss/reward what is the end result? You have what designers call a 'victory condition'

This is why Lynx tried to get you to understand his Chess example. Chess has a victory condition.

Risk / loot pvp games have victory conditions.

Think bout two guilds that fight each other. When you beat the other Guild so bad and make them expend resources you are creating a victory condition. They can no longer fight you. All the time in EVE i have seen Guilds surrender. This is a foreign concept to WoW players

Games like WoW lack 'victory conditions'. PVPers fight all night long pointlessly. They just respawn and respawn all night long like noobs. Even FPS games have victory conditions. WoW attempted to create artificial victory conditions in their BGs and such but its not the same

You cannot have a true victory condition unless you take away something from the enemy to disable them from fighting you again.

Also, this empowers players to enforce justice in their Guild owned lands. Looting or severe penalties is a REQUIREMENT. Not an option. Otherwise, griefers can just come and gank your crafters / traders all day long and never suffer any penalty. This could never work in a sandbox where Guilds own land.

" I know that but it still isn't something most people can afford to do. It seems counter productive to try and get really nice things if I probably can't afford to replace them when I get looted."

That's the GREAT part. You don't want so overpowered griefer running around with the best stuff in the game- torturing your crafters / miners / ratters (in EVE that is the name of players that grind mobs and pay tax to corps). When there is a penalty involved, it allows you to knock this griefer down a few notches.

Richard Bartle understood this. You should check out his work on virtual worlds. He wrote that players must be knocked down otherwise the 'tyrants' will gain a grip on the world and no one can ever topple them off the pyramid

Additionally, read the other posts where we described how your Alliance / corp has ship replacement programs. So most of the time you not hurting the player per se, you're hurting an organization that is hellbent on your destruction.

edit-

TLDR Version: Without some form of loss / severe penalty there is no way to create meaningful World PVP where players can have natural victory conditions.

Originally posted by girlgeek

Originally posted by PatchDay

Originally posted by girlgeek

Originally posted by Kyleran

Originally posted by spyderbite

I miss full loot rights.. aka.. Dry Looting.

There was nothing funnier than the days of listening/watching somebody cry and threaten harm to themselves as you cut up their armor or tossed the weapon they'd farmed in to the trash.

Meh... it is a new age of gaming. The "hardcore" players are now time investors.. and the "pvp" players are now called unstable or anti-social. Things have changed quite a bit from the day when gaming was dangerous, exciting and fun.

The fact that you enjoy the first highlighted sentence sort of proves the case for the 2nd one.

Finding enjoyment in the pain of others is a bit twisted no matter how you look at it.

As for full loot, I don't care for it.  Neither do most people who claim that they do, they make sure they are always on the winning end of the fight by either ganking lower level players or running in packs that can never lose.

I play EVE, but only because its pretty easy to avoid losing my stuff, even when I'm in low sec or 0.0.

I avoid DF because I believe that it would be far more difficult to prevent being looted, and I'm just not into that.

 

 

I agree.

And what's really funny, is that these same people who laugh at the pain they're causing another player, are the very same ones that whine, get pissed, and sometimes, ultimately, quit the game when a player better than them comes along and repeatedly starts killing them, over and over and over, and taking all the phat lewts that they have stolen from someone ELSE.

I don't care what anyone SAYS they "like," no reasonable human being enjoys having things they've invested time and effort to obtain....stolen from them. No one enjoys THAT part. 

The gamers that profess to "enjoy" FFA loot PvP, only enjoy it when they have the upper hand and they're the ones doing the stealing. Because no one with any amount of common sense could possible say they enjoy someone else taking all their shit, unless they're actually mentally ill, or masochistic, or something.

Over all, I think for myself, I just don't enjoy playing games with people that have that sort of mentality of enjoying griefing and causing loss, irritation, and frustration to other people. Oh sure, it's "a game," but the fact that someone enjoys any kind of behavior, whether actual or virtual, that upsets and frustrates another person....speaks volumes to me about their real life character. Enough to let me know that they're not the kind of person that I'm interested in spending hours with playing a game.

I choose my online "playmates," in a very similar way to how I choose my friends OFFline. I want to hang around with fairly good and decent people. But that's just me.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I wish I knew what FFA PVP game posters like this one played. Because in EVE Online, they have high security areas so if you do not want to be griefed by other players its easdy to avoid

Next up you have the other extreme, nullsec (0.0). Here, you have player run security and Intel channels. You should have plenty fair warning in most cases when an enemy enters the space your Guild owns

What you speak of is anarchy which does not exist in EVE Online

 

 

Additionally, I want to highlight this sentence:

Kyleran wrote: "Finding enjoyment in the pain of others is a bit twisted no matter how you look at it."

 

I find it twisted that someone can feel pain just because they lost virtual loot. It really is just pixels on the screen. If they are that emotionally attached to an arcade game, they probably have personal issues that stem far beyond gaming.

 

However in EVE Online, when we've killed hostiles it was really just business. I don't recall anyone crying or threatening they wopuld quit. But I admit if they did, I would probably laugh. And of course I'd never believe them.

All the time I see people go into a tirade on EVE forums when disaster strikes but after a few hours/days I see them log right back in

 

 

Is this in the EVE forums?  Am I hallucinating the "General Discussion" title at the top of the page?

NO ONE said anything about EVE except EVE players trying to defend their game.

I've played EVE, and I never said anything about EVE. First of all, in my opinion, EVE is NOT an FFA loot PvP game. It's a PvP game with LOOT RULES. That's an entirely different thing.

Darkfall is more the type game I'm talking about, and yes...it's essentially anarchy.

 

What??? EVE has always been an FFA PVP game. Last time I checked, I can murder my guildmates and take their loot.

FFA = Free for All PVP

That is fine you think differently but you're totally incorrect on so many levels on this one

And if you think Darkfall has no rules you couldn't be more wrong. It's okay if you do not like the game but at least play the game for 5 mins before you spread misinformation.

All it should take you is 5 mins to discover Darkfall has rules

CO had a lot of nice ideas on paper. I guess I'll go down the list n things I've found out to not work out so well for me ingame:

1) 1 Server

I was hoping it would be like EVE Online where you could have no limit to people in the 'world' itself. I also assumed you'd form a group and go into a randomly generated mission like you do in CoX.

This is not so. Instead they have 'zones' and cap them to 100? 

IT's not bad but something bout it just didnt feel like a virtual world too me. But I liked the idea of a 1 server world. I loved guild wars & EVE

2) Classless system

I love Classless MMOs. But CO did a strange thing. They make you pick an endurance builder (your first power). And you can only have 1 end builder power. This end power you have to spam over and over and over to build Stamina / Endurance / Mana. So right there I didnt feel like any superhero from Comics. Superman doesnt have to spam punches to do some awesome attack... I dont know of any superhero that works like this

Worst, it creates a Melee vs Ranged atmosphere. Cause if you pick a Melee builder you basically stuck as a close ranged Class. If you pick a ranged one, you are a ranged Class.

So, they really didnt go fully classless. I dont care what the fans of this game would have you to believe its not freeform like EVE, Linkrealms, UO, etc.

So the bad news is if you go with a Melee end builder and walk into PVP arena you gonna get pwned from what I've seen. Nothing you can do to fix it. The Melee end builder itself just makes ya a gimp (pvp wise). In PVE, its awful too. On a team, your ranged teammates have lots of knockback and crap. So mobs will get knocked away and killed before your melee gets in range. And worse, you cant stay in range to build endurance. LOL.

Bad game design yo

3) PVP

Just half implemented. No playable villain side is a real bummer. City of Villains really spoiled me. I liked having access to both factions.

PVPers, most of you will feel like you paying for half of an MMO :(

4) PVE

You get to fight radiactive hillbillies, robot cowboys, gangsters, animal hybrids, & cowboy ghosts. ugh, nuff said. PVE was very uninspired :(

5) Balance

Pretty bloody awful. Every other patch contains nerfs and more nerfs. I mean, you could just be a casual player like I was and still got the kicked in the nuts with every patch.

I hate to say it but this game is just kinda bad. The people that play it must just have extremely low standards. The fanboys on this site must be on Cryptic payroll thats gotta be the only explanation. My entire guild (Penny Arcade) like quit CO.

Originally posted by Naryysys

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by Tobias3

Oh, we're counting PvP servers now? 

 

Well then Darkfall is still top dog, but second place could be VIRTUALLY ANY MMO EVER. 

Almost every MMO that has ever come out has had a full PvP server, that odes not make them an "open world PvP" mmo, because its almost always tacked on as an afterthought. 

 

I want to say Dark Age of Camelot is an open PvP game, but it isn't. It has an entire realm safe zone, but you'd be hard pressed to find a game with bigger PvP area than the frontiers, Darkness Falls, and the Labyrinthe. In reality though, open world PvP means games like Eve and Darkfall. 

 

So how many other pure PvP MMO's have every 2.5 hours around 100/200 players on average doing massive Siege fights on EACH of those 596 servers.? EVERY 2.5 hours ....

I only use the WOTLK countries (not China). Fighting that is, not searching for a fight.

Not including City Raids or constantly skirmishes/ganking. Not  including those that do the daily world PvP quests.

And since this is world PvP not including the thousands doing the 6 Bg's and 6 Arena's of course...

Yep there is no world PvP in WOW. :)))

 More people play PvP in WOW than in ALL other MMO's combined. You only have to decide the factor (10, 20, 50 ?).

Clearly PvP is just "attached" to as an aftertought. :)

 

Not to comment on what game has the best open world PvP, but you're using the population in WoW as a way to justify it being "open world PvP".  The definition by which one classifies an MMO as "open world PvP" or not has nothing to do with the number of players PvPing, and rightfully so.  Modern Warfare 2 has hundreds of thousands of players PvPing at any moment of any day, has only an average wait time of around 2 or 3 minutes to get into a fight, and allows players to fight on every inch of whatever map they're playing on.  That, however, does not qualify it as an "open world PvP" game.  Citing the popularity of a game to qualify it into a category it may or may not be in is flawed logic.

 

Edited for Grammar.

I don't think he is trying to argue WoW is an open world PVP server anymore.

Originally posted by jimmyman99

Originally posted by Knifo

 you clearly did not see my point either.  What game do you seriously know of that does not require the same amount of time to reach endgame?

 

This is not Quake Online,  its Darkfall Online.   The reason I raged was because I am so sick and tired of these complainers on the DFO forums asking for stat gain fixes.  

The Dev's dont want everyone to reach endgame because there would be a MASS desertion due to lack of content.  This is why I ask if you have ever played an MMO before.  Because you clearly have not.  Its the same with every game,  Look at Tabula Rasa for example.  Everyone rushed to endgame and left.  

 

The DFO devs are WAY smarter than that.

Your just QQing because if they increase stat gains, noobs will be able to catch up with macroers like you and you won't be able to 4 shot them anymore. No more easymode for u.

Can a noob die in 4 shots though? Ah, there must be some skill we have to grind to increase our health then?

I was thinking to resub on NA server is why i ask. One of these days....

I was interested in resubbing to DFO (was busy playing EVE). So--- I think I get what vets are pointing out that noobs can contribute to clan warfare. If its anything like EVE--- if you're doing a 1v1 you're just doing it wrong unless you really know what you're doing (for instance, you are prepared if multiple enemies jump in to help the other guy)

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by PatchDay

Originally posted by Thenarius

Originally posted by Knightcry

I would consider L2 open pvp as well but judging from what some of the people in this thread it can't be. You can't attack in town so by their reasoning(which works only for their argument) it isn't open pvp.  L2 had a great siege system, one of the best. It's too bad there wasn't much else to do other than grind.

Heh, the towns were almost needed given the atmosphere of L2. 
Killing the wrong person would limit that character's gameplay to them, since you wouldn't be able to do something else.
The grind was fun because it was mostly group-only, and the possibilities of griefing/drama/alliance wars always gave you something to do.

 

Wonder why they couldn't spawn guards to kill the person that showed aggression? But having never played L2 past low levels I'd lack the knowledge to say it isn't. From what I know of it, I'd not oppose others suggesting it.

 

actually that would make more sense, having guards rush in etc in cities to deal with aggression, in Eve its pretty much that way in High Sec (unless wardec'd) where if an act of aggression is carried out in high sec, concord (guards) warp in and lock down and then eliminate the aggressor.  far more realistic imo, than just having combat free areas..
 

Exactly. I really want to just say Lineage 2 isn't a true open world pvp game due to the fact it has a safe area :(

That would just be my personal opinion.

I recall reading Paragus blog here on this site about Asheron's Call 1 Darktide whereas you could even be killed while spawning into a town. That is my idea of an open world pvp server. You can at least be attacked / killed in towns.

Originally posted by Thenarius

Originally posted by Knightcry

I would consider L2 open pvp as well but judging from what some of the people in this thread it can't be. You can't attack in town so by their reasoning(which works only for their argument) it isn't open pvp.  L2 had a great siege system, one of the best. It's too bad there wasn't much else to do other than grind.

Heh, the towns were almost needed given the atmosphere of L2. 
Killing the wrong person would limit that character's gameplay to them, since you wouldn't be able to do something else.
The grind was fun because it was mostly group-only, and the possibilities of griefing/drama/alliance wars always gave you something to do.

Wonder why they couldn't spawn guards to kill the person that showed aggression? But having never played L2 past low levels I'd lack the knowledge to say it isn't. From what I know of it, I'd not oppose others suggesting it.

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by PatchDay

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by Tobias3

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by Cecropia

Originally posted by Zorndorf

 

Wintergrasp is pop capped to 240 guys fighting, but you can always go there and join the fight and it is Realm based and  NOT instanced.

 

 

 

Even with this, you still consider it an open world pvp game?

You may want to quietly exit the thread and move on to something more WOWish.

its a respectable enough figure, in Eve, large scale fleet battles have to be, as much as possible anyway, scheduled 24 hrs notice etc,  in order for them to be reasonably .. well i wouldnt say lag free .. but  certainly.. minimise the effects..though the numbers are usually 500+
 

It has no bearing on the outside "realms" and it's fairly limited in scope to other PvP games like DAoC and Darkfall.

One zone does not an open world PvP game make. 

You are always flagged for PvP on a PvP server, WG just has tiny extra RvR awards attached to it when you conquer the Keep there. All the other open world zones are PvP enabled.

I am not saying it is the best in open world PvP. All I am saying is that playing on a good PvP server is quite good these days (with the extra City Raid schedules most hardcore PvP guilds organise - with achievements btw).

RvR can be advanced and upgraded, but it is a risky business in a game like WOW. Players want to win instead of losing and cancel subs...

The times of saying that there is no world PvP have long gone since WotK.

Now what are the best PvP guilds? I know many who only recruit players ABOVE a rating of 2000 arena (that's high, very high).

I can recommend Al'Akir and Stormscale in EU.

 

I think my friends alluded to this but I do not agree people are always flagged on PVP servers in WoW. When I last played on Mal'ganis, I don't recall us being able to kill unflagged players when we raided Alliance cities.

This was a big no-no in my book. This allowed various exploits that I'm sure Blizzard patched by now. But back in those days Paladins could attack you with AoE and not be flagged for PVP

 

And this was on a PVP server (Mal'ganis - I was horde shaman)

The moment you attack someone, you are flagged for PvP.

And in the contested zones you are always flagged. Meaning about all zones except friendly or neutral cities.

 It is there, not the best perhaps, but it is there.

 

That is correct; WoW PVP Servers are voluntary like a PVE server in this regard :(

This is another reason why it's far from being an open world pvp game.

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by PatchDay

Originally posted by Phry

its a respectable enough figure, in Eve, large scale fleet battles have to be, as much as possible anyway, scheduled 24 hrs notice etc,  in order for them to be reasonably .. well i wouldnt say lag free .. but  certainly.. minimise the effects..though the numbers are usually 500+
 

 

I'm not so impressed by 240 anymore. There are FPS games coming out that will be 256. Like MAG for PS3 for instance.

If an FPS can get me 256 players together in a zone, I'd expect a product claiming to be 'Massive multiplayer' to give me much more.

 

Ever thought about the loading times to load the players data for the "next zone" in a FPS. (from your HD's of course ...)

Dreadful loading graphics screens can not be applied too much (or even not at ALL) in mmorpg's with an open world PvP....

So I am amazed it took so long before 256 became standard in "preloading graphics FPS".

You would NEVER accept loading screens while fighting in your mmorpg's (for the unexpected players showing up).

Never.

Also the server side data handling is MUCH more intesnsive for an mmorpg. MUCH more.

 

That depends. You can compare Ryzom / Lineage 2 (look at book written by one of their devs) open sources  to the open sources released for Quake / Half life 2.

Load times is a purely client side thing tho.

Originally posted by Zorndorf

Originally posted by Tobias3

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by Cecropia

Originally posted by Zorndorf

 

Wintergrasp is pop capped to 240 guys fighting, but you can always go there and join the fight and it is Realm based and  NOT instanced.

 

 

 

Even with this, you still consider it an open world pvp game?

You may want to quietly exit the thread and move on to something more WOWish.

its a respectable enough figure, in Eve, large scale fleet battles have to be, as much as possible anyway, scheduled 24 hrs notice etc,  in order for them to be reasonably .. well i wouldnt say lag free .. but  certainly.. minimise the effects..though the numbers are usually 500+
 

It has no bearing on the outside "realms" and it's fairly limited in scope to other PvP games like DAoC and Darkfall.

One zone does not an open world PvP game make. 

You are always flagged for PvP on a PvP server, WG just has tiny extra RvR awards attached to it when you conquer the Keep there. All the other open world zones are PvP enabled.

I am not saying it is the best in open world PvP. All I am saying is that playing on a good PvP server is quite good these days (with the extra City Raid schedules most hardcore PvP guilds organise - with achievements btw).

RvR can be advanced and upgraded, but it is a risky business in a game like WOW. Players want to win instead of losing and cancel subs...

The times of saying that there is no world PvP have long gone since WotK.

Now what are the best PvP guilds? I know many who only recruit players ABOVE a rating of 2000 arena (that's high, very high).

I can recommend Al'Akir and Stormscale in EU.

 

I think my friends alluded to this but I do not agree people are always flagged on PVP servers in WoW. When I last played on Mal'ganis, I don't recall us being able to kill unflagged players when we raided Alliance cities.

This was a big no-no in my book. This allowed various exploits that I'm sure Blizzard patched by now. But back in those days Paladins could attack you with AoE and not be flagged for PVP

And this was on a PVP server (Mal'ganis - I was horde shaman)

Originally posted by Phry

Originally posted by Cecropia

Originally posted by Zorndorf

 

Wintergrasp is pop capped to 240 guys fighting, but you can always go there and join the fight and it is Realm based and  NOT instanced.

 

 

 

Even with this, you still consider it an open world pvp game?

You may want to quietly exit the thread and move on to something more WOWish.

its a respectable enough figure, in Eve, large scale fleet battles have to be, as much as possible anyway, scheduled 24 hrs notice etc,  in order for them to be reasonably .. well i wouldnt say lag free .. but  certainly.. minimise the effects..though the numbers are usually 500+
 

I'm not so impressed by 240 anymore. There are FPS games coming out that will be 256. Like MAG for PS3 for instance.

If an FPS can get me 256 players together in a zone, I'd expect a product claiming to be 'Massive multiplayer' to give me much more.

Originally posted by Tobias3

 Of course, M&B is easily the best combat system in ANY medieval game. Especially in the Warband beta. However, it's all a bit too much for being online, too many calculations. The closest you're gonna get is Darkfall. 

Someone is a programmer or thinks like one. Yes, due to bandwidth concerns, MMO devs tend to embrace reducing the amount of packets being sent from clients to the bare minimum. And vice versa. This is why auto attack is so well loved by MMO devs :(

That being said, I have yet to play M&B indepth but from what I saw in the demo I think it's possible to bring to MMO space.

It's a tricky subject but the main reason I believe we havent really seen attempts (beyond darkfall, the devs were inspired by M&B), is due to publishers just wanting to maintain status quo and sort of stick to tradition (EQ style auto attack)

OP wrote in that other thread stuff like this:

"srry for tat. nd wat i like to play mmos is tat r quick in duelin like RO instances like WOW nd wich r basically fun to play nd more importantly f2p(i no im askin for a lot but i cant help it ive played so many mmos its gettin borin now)"

Now your posts are clearly readable all of a sudden. I don't know what to believe but I seriously doubt anything you say. I doubt you really live in India to be honest. But I'm just gonna let it go

The OP refers to this thread "Is Guild Wars II free?"

People didn't make fun of you just because you wanted a F2P title. They made fun of you because you were really hard to understand and came across as---- well, cant think of a good way to say it.... Let's just say your post were barely legible / readable.

So now I am wondering what is going on because in this thread you are now typing clearly. But in the other thread you started, your posts were barely readable