GvG siege questions
-
@gothix said in GvG siege questions:
@Jetah iirc The Secret World worked that way. They had several servers around the world function as connection spots, but players played together.
I really kind of miss my leech healer in Secret World.
-
@kellewic I miss my conflag demonologist from Age of Conan. More then 10k kills over the years. Alot in sieges.
-
@benseine said in GvG siege questions:
I'm sure there will be a whole spotlight about this somewhere down the road. But what is the basis of the GvG siege content you devs have in mind for Fractured?
10vs10? 50vs50? 100vs100? Unlimited? Instanced for better performance? Open world for the best sandbox experience? You must have some global picture you can give us, right?
First things first. Instances are out of the game. Even pve instances are unlikely. PvP instances are even more unlikely from my understanding.
This brings us to;
Open world for the best sandbox experience
as the devs aim to;
...innovate the world of Sandbox MMOs by opening it up to audiences that have been cut off from what we believe is the most exciting online game genre out there - and one with exceptional growth perspectives, too.
That aside, unlimited is impossible for technical reasons (yeah, I know that you were kidding, but still, clarifying, just in case). As for their limit? That is unknown and they haven't made any announcements at a goal, as far as I know.
Considering a number of things like; a) the top down perspective with no heavy graphics, b) Unity, c) SpatialOS, I'd say that they will manage 100-300 tops.
-
@phaethonas said in GvG siege questions:
Considering a number of things like; a) the top down perspective with no heavy graphics, b) Unity, c) SpatialOS, I'd say that they will manage 100-300 tops.
It could be "the last man standing" combat style, so it would get better as it approaches the end.
(which might very well be, due to full loot system, and people loosing their shit when they die)
-
@phaethonas said in GvG siege questions:
@benseine said in GvG siege questions:
I'm sure there will be a whole spotlight about this somewhere down the road. But what is the basis of the GvG siege content you devs have in mind for Fractured?
10vs10? 50vs50? 100vs100? Unlimited? Instanced for better performance? Open world for the best sandbox experience? You must have some global picture you can give us, right?
First things first. Instances are out of the game. Even pve instances are unlikely. PvP instances are even more unlikely from my understanding.
This brings us to;
Open world for the best sandbox experience
as the devs aim to;
...innovate the world of Sandbox MMOs by opening it up to audiences that have been cut off from what we believe is the most exciting online game genre out there - and one with exceptional growth perspectives, too.
That aside, unlimited is impossible for technical reasons (yeah, I know that you were kidding, but still, clarifying, just in case). As for their limit? That is unknown and they haven't made any announcements at a goal, as far as I know.
Considering a number of things like; a) the top down perspective with no heavy graphics, b) Unity, c) SpatialOS, I'd say that they will manage 100-300 tops.
But if they don't instance it, how do you prevent that the defending side pushes the number of ppl at the siege to +500 and crashes the server to prevent them loosing the siege? Or atleast make it so unplayable you just can't win?
-
bubbles around the area. about all i can think of. i know archeage had limited numbers for sieges but i don't remember how it was done.
-
@jetah said in GvG siege questions:
bubbles around the area. about all i can think of. i know archeage had limited numbers for sieges but i don't remember how it was done.
Yeah, iirc in ArcheAge zones around the castle turned to siege area, and I forgot what exactly happened when people not assigned to siege tried to enter. They either died, or got ported out.
However, in Archeage that was OK, cause siege was GvG, and guilds chose people that would join the siege, so noone else had nothing to look for there.
In case of open world siege, that allows multiple guilds to attack, who would have the right to select who can join in and who can't? (this is the issue)
First come first served doesn't seem right, cause if you are unfortunate and multiple randoms fill the spots first, then your guild members can't enter, and what if your guild is the main factor in defending a city? (they control it)
Adding extra rules so that first "controlling" guilds enter, then if there is room it allows more people in, could get complicated and still pose issues, what if some people disconnect... are then new people allowed to take their place? What if people return after being disconnected, and their controlling guild misses them, but now there is no place for them to join back into?
Multiple issues to consider here if siege spots will be limited.
-
@benseine said in GvG siege questions:
But if they don't instance it, how do you prevent that the defending side pushes the number of ppl at the siege to +500 and crashes the server to prevent them loosing the siege?
A benefit of SpatialOS is that server resources scale based on need. The bigger problem would likely be clients trying to render all of it.
-
@benseine said in GvG siege questions:
Open world for the best sandbox experience?
This i would prefer, because it keeps the politics up!
-
i thought AWS could scale as needed, assumed the client paid for x even though they only needed less than x.
-
@jetah I don't really know enough about either AWS or SpatialOS to really say. But I think the difference is that AWS scaling is just throwing more servers at an issue which doesn't necessarily work for video game calculations, and SpatialOS has more sophisticated communication between servers that allows multiple servers to handle the same thing. I could be and am likely pretty wrong though. @Prometheus or someone with more knowledge than me would have to clarify.
