Since having 7 heroes is going to happen, why not have a new form of GvG, Siege GvG, that makes use of it. With more characters involved, namely a ton of heroes, tactics might change a little... ie AoE could be more beneficial, positioning and splits might be more important as well.
Since GW is supposed to be a game of GvG, why not use this as an opportunity to integrate the new changes into a PvP format just for it.
64v64 Siege GvG
Winterclaw
turbo234
wat
although i highly doubt itll happen..it would be awesome
although i highly doubt itll happen..it would be awesome
drkn
So you propose a new form of massive GvG, at least for GW standards, that will involve playing with ~48 heroes?
I fully support all the siege-like ideas for GW, or any mass PvP really, but keep heroes out of it. Instead, some sort of opportunity to join it both as a random player and as an organised party would be cool.
I fully support all the siege-like ideas for GW, or any mass PvP really, but keep heroes out of it. Instead, some sort of opportunity to join it both as a random player and as an organised party would be cool.
lemming
If you want a bigger version of Fort Aspenwood, that's fine, but don't call it GvG.
Rites
considering they removed the use of heroes in the PvP arenas for being able to use certain skills (mainly interrupts) better than humans..... i dont see it happening
Tried and Triumphed
Mass PvP where hero's are allowed and the objective is to kill the opposing teams guild lord and the abililty to join as random is made possible sounds really fun. Wouldn't happen though=[
makosi
I'm using Edge of Extinction!
Morituri
I can see an 8 Monk team chilling with the Guild Lord. And every single hero has Protective Was Kaolai
Ok Dont Panic
Best way to do this would be get a team of 4 or 8 and join them all together... Like AB but bigger...
Ariena Najea
The game is "balanced" for 8v8. 64v64 would be a joke.
I'd be running 64x Ravenous Gaze spike.
I'd be running 64x Ravenous Gaze spike.
Shayne Hawke
I don't want to see something like this, and even if I did, I don't think this is even feasible. Last I knew, it was a stretch in itself to even get all 24 players into AB at once. I doubt something so fantastic has happened or has ever been in the works to bring that number up to anything near 64.
aga
This would be crap, imo. From what I've expericed in other games with large scale PvP it's really not good, all that happens is everyone plays a ranged class, because if you're a melee in large scale PvP you're useless as taking 1-2 steps towards your opponents will result in you being killed before you realise you've been hit.
Winterclaw
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by lemming
If you want a bigger version of Fort Aspenwood, that's fine, but don't call it GvG.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ariena
The game is "balanced" for 8v8. 64v64 would be a joke.
I'd be running 64x Ravenous Gaze spike. |
chuckles79
64 on 64 would be just a battle of spikes. The only interesting parts would be the "last men standing" after the initial spamfest, which I'm certain will end up as 8 vs 8 90% of the time.
Now 16 on 16 in a FA setting would be epic.
Now 16 on 16 in a FA setting would be epic.
Del
hell no. Just, no. it would be a balance nightmare, as well as a massive clusterfook.
/notsigned
/notsigned
Norian
This should be available when GW2 comes out 
rick1027
i like the idea not sure if id play it but i think it would give something different but finding enough playerbase might be hard while itll take people away from fa and jq making those longer waits when there is no zaishen quest... so im gonna say not signed but like the idea
-Makai-
/signed /signed /signed
Because Dark Age of Camelot has been dead for years.
Because Dark Age of Camelot has been dead for years.
Reverend Dr
I really think a large almost deathmatch styled would be good. Just like the large DM servers for FPS games that people can easily jump in and later leave, it can give people easy access to a pvp format. Sure anyone can join RA, but with 1/4 of the team being you, a new player is going to have a much harder time having the team carry him than in 12v12 16v16 24v24 etc.
As far as balance goes, of course it is going to be terribly balanced. Don't let people join in more than groups of 4 or so to keep composition random and make sure the rewards aren't high enough to encourage AFK. (though there probably would need to be some mechanic to get rid of AFK players and have anyone that left replaced mid-match)
As far as balance goes, of course it is going to be terribly balanced. Don't let people join in more than groups of 4 or so to keep composition random and make sure the rewards aren't high enough to encourage AFK. (though there probably would need to be some mechanic to get rid of AFK players and have anyone that left replaced mid-match)