vivisect
Offline
Sergeant
Posts: 16
|
 |
« on: September 24, 2009, 08:46:29 AM » |
|
My friend made a point that 12v12 could be too small. I don't exactly agree, but I wonder if their will be bigger and bigger matches. I am sure they tested/are testing with various numbers, but will 12v12 be epic enough?
Thinking back on counter-strike, 12v12 was nuts, but the rounds were very short.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bion
Offline
Colonel
Posts: 98
|
|
« Reply #1 on: September 24, 2009, 08:53:12 AM » |
|
I actually think it will work great, because the way GA is set up is that the 12v12 battles can actually be part of a larger offensive that is linked. Todd Harris of Hi-Rez has stated on a number of occasions that alliances can launch multiple 12v12 attacks that are linked together.
As an example, one team can strike part of an enemy base in order to knock out the power cores, which would then lower the turret defenses in another area where a second offensive is taking place. Each 12v12 match is then linked, but you never have to face an entire army. The beauty of this system is that zerging is eliminated. It also means that an offensive can succeed in one area and not another, so partial success is possible (as opposed to one side totally wiping out the other).
I think the system will lend itself to far strategic maneuvers on the global scale.
B
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
DeathDefier
Offline
|
|
« Reply #2 on: September 24, 2009, 10:47:57 AM » |
|
There's going to be 60 on 60 battles, it's just that they are going to be instanced and doing things in one instance can effect things in another instance. I think 12 vs 12 is perfect if you think about it because it would get really chaotic as a shooter if there were tons of people.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Faildir
Offline
Corporal
Posts: 10
|
|
« Reply #3 on: September 24, 2009, 06:42:09 PM » |
|
It depends on the map size, ultimately. However, I find in many games that 12 v 12 is the best balance with perfect numbers in most if not all maps. Its not to much, but its not to little.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Malevian
Offline
|
|
« Reply #4 on: September 24, 2009, 07:35:13 PM » |
|
Well I would hope for something on a larger scale. Instancing is a good idea to relieve stress on the servers for sure. I am looking more towards battles of a couple hundred or so. I think those are the best. Chaotic, strategic, and overall a lot of fun. Granted we don't want a zerg fest so something about balance would have to be addressed there.
I don't know exactly. We all know many games have tried to create massive PvP areas or situations. These usually resulted in major server crashes and stability issues. Hopefully something can be worked out so it pleases everyone.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bion
Offline
Colonel
Posts: 98
|
|
« Reply #5 on: September 24, 2009, 09:22:43 PM » |
|
I was under the impression that even the 60v60 or higher stuff would still be parceled out into 12v12 matches. I seem to remember Todd Harris really pumping up the 12v12 game size as the key.
B
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Wick
Offline
Corporal
Posts: 10
|
|
« Reply #6 on: September 25, 2009, 02:06:03 AM » |
|
Well I would hope for something on a larger scale. Instancing is a good idea to relieve stress on the servers for sure. I am looking more towards battles of a couple hundred or so. I think those are the best. Chaotic, strategic, and overall a lot of fun. Granted we don't want a zerg fest so something about balance would have to be addressed there.
I don't know exactly. We all know many games have tried to create massive PvP areas or situations. These usually resulted in major server crashes and stability issues. Hopefully something can be worked out so it pleases everyone.
Don't think that is going to happen. I like big epic battles as well, but there is a down side ...zerging and lazy folk. they have stated they want every player to be involved..no 10 minute breaks in a battle where no one notices you left. they dont want zergfests..ie no open world , and they want it to be about teamwork and strategy so that constitutes the smal group numbers |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bion
Offline
Colonel
Posts: 98
|
|
« Reply #7 on: September 25, 2009, 06:18:37 AM » |
|
Aye...that sounds more like what I have heard and understood.
B
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
vivisect
Offline
Sergeant
Posts: 16
|
|
« Reply #8 on: September 25, 2009, 08:15:31 AM » |
|
I had not heard about the linking of matches. And 60v60 would be crazy. I kind of thought about this a bit more after I posted, and I think that 12v12 would be pretty good, but I know a lot of people might want more.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bion
Offline
Colonel
Posts: 98
|
|
« Reply #9 on: September 25, 2009, 08:51:55 AM » |
|
Yeah they might, but if the linked objectives thing works out, I think having the fast paced 12v12 (less frame rate issues!) should be great. Of course, we won't know until we try the game  B |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sparra
Offline
Sergeant
Posts: 16
|
|
« Reply #10 on: September 25, 2009, 08:58:34 AM » |
|
I think 12v12 is a nice size... As far as the 60v60 AvA raids go, it's six squads of TEN, not twelve... which means if you're doing great on one front but bad in another, you can shift people around to try and help out the weaker raid. Of course, the 12v10 advantage is offset by 8v10 in another instance.
TF2 gets away with 12v12 and I think that's plenty of action with just enough chaos to make things fun, but not zergy. Hopefully map design will help eliminate "meat grinder" chokepoints (which are never fun), as well as the use of jetpacks.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bion
Offline
Colonel
Posts: 98
|
|
« Reply #11 on: September 25, 2009, 09:03:35 AM » |
|
Can you shift people between instances on the fly? That would add a huge amount of tactical consideration to the game...
B
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Sparra
Offline
Sergeant
Posts: 16
|
|
« Reply #12 on: September 25, 2009, 09:18:40 AM » |
|
Can you shift people between instances on the fly? That would add a huge amount of tactical consideration to the game...
From what I recall, yes you can. You can also change your loadout at the dropship that you start at (not sure what'll be used when defending a base though). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Bion
Offline
Colonel
Posts: 98
|
|
« Reply #13 on: September 25, 2009, 09:26:15 AM » |
|
That sounds great! I am really looking forward to this B |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Malevian
Offline
|
|
« Reply #14 on: September 25, 2009, 10:44:21 AM » |
|
Changing out the squads like that will be a nice addition for balancing the groups involved. I guess we won't know for sure until we see it first hand.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
