Perhaps they already thought of this, but, I really think Arena.net should take the next logical step in the PvP section.
Make a true massively PvP map. 32 people to each side. A plethora of siege equipment. Tunnels that you can "unlock" to go under the enemie's walls by gathering rare red iris flowers (yeah, I know, a weird item, but it'd work) to give to a collector so he'd turn it into an explosive to blast open the jammed shut door.
Well, there are other ways to go about it, but, seriously, a 64 man battle would ROCK. I'd love to see a Aeromancer-Monk team of 32 people go head to head with War/Necs and Mesmers. With observation mode on the way, it would be awe inspiring to watch.
Give us a WAR!
Ancalagon06
zman_acura
i agree. If they did this you don't even know how happy i'd be!
Padre
The reason there are only 8-person teams in PvP is that any higher and real strategy breaks down. Try to coordinate a 32 man team.... and you'll get nothing but chaos as soon as you run into the other team.
it would be interesting to watch, i suppose, but not all that fun to play.
it would be interesting to watch, i suppose, but not all that fun to play.
Ancalagon06
from what I've experienced in battlegrounds in WoW, it's not only possible, but incredibly fun. It's still not enough to make me pay the monthly fee for WoW, but it came very close. Not to mention that when I played Battlefield, I fought in matches that large. It boils down to your side sitting down beforehand and picking out who will be boss, and then going from there.
A side note: the 64 person maps will have to be huge. Otherwise, it'll REALLY be grind wars, as people are forced to mob one another while healers desperatly spam healing spells from the back while elementalists try to get off a few good spells before the onrushing tide of swords and armors hits them.
On second thought, give us maps that are both large and small.
A side note: the 64 person maps will have to be huge. Otherwise, it'll REALLY be grind wars, as people are forced to mob one another while healers desperatly spam healing spells from the back while elementalists try to get off a few good spells before the onrushing tide of swords and armors hits them.
On second thought, give us maps that are both large and small.
DrSLUGFly
I fully agree!!! large scale maps, they don't even have to design the maps just give us PvPable instances out of PvE. Since the maps are done there would be dozens of ready-made maps for large scale wars. (although your idea of maps with stuff in the me is pretty good)
AS for the strategy breaking down, not at all. You just divide the labor. You have one person leading a team of 6 whose job is behind the scenes, casting hexes and enchantments. You have 3 people leading 3 teams of 6 whose job is front line attacking (with a healer on each team), plus one person organizing each of the 3 delivering messages to the leaders of each team. Then you have 2 people running catapults, and one person from the highest vantage point commanding the whole thing. That's 32. Bloody awesome. If this were implemented then 2 additions would be required.
A: A strategies center in guild hall with draw-on-able maps and blank boards, as well as a guild-only instance where 64 people could play at once (on two teams) Without this, it would indeed be chaos because there would be no way to organize since every time all players would be fighting for their lives and not fulfilling roles.
B: A way to divide the teams officially so that
-teams speak only to their leaders and within teams
-leaders speak only to the other leaders and their own teams
-attack commander speaks only to other leaders
-overall commander speaks only to leaders
EDIT: this would be easily handled with the !#$ buttons used already on PvE, @ would have to stay as guild and " would have to stay as whisper but ! could be to all players, # could be to team (ie. your division) and $ could be to leader and high commander only.
All toggle-able, but it would simplify communication down the lines and allow for better teamwork... man, this would completely rock!
AS for the strategy breaking down, not at all. You just divide the labor. You have one person leading a team of 6 whose job is behind the scenes, casting hexes and enchantments. You have 3 people leading 3 teams of 6 whose job is front line attacking (with a healer on each team), plus one person organizing each of the 3 delivering messages to the leaders of each team. Then you have 2 people running catapults, and one person from the highest vantage point commanding the whole thing. That's 32. Bloody awesome. If this were implemented then 2 additions would be required.
A: A strategies center in guild hall with draw-on-able maps and blank boards, as well as a guild-only instance where 64 people could play at once (on two teams) Without this, it would indeed be chaos because there would be no way to organize since every time all players would be fighting for their lives and not fulfilling roles.
B: A way to divide the teams officially so that
-teams speak only to their leaders and within teams
-leaders speak only to the other leaders and their own teams
-attack commander speaks only to other leaders
-overall commander speaks only to leaders
EDIT: this would be easily handled with the !#$ buttons used already on PvE, @ would have to stay as guild and " would have to stay as whisper but ! could be to all players, # could be to team (ie. your division) and $ could be to leader and high commander only.
All toggle-able, but it would simplify communication down the lines and allow for better teamwork... man, this would completely rock!
Ytrill
will never ever happen...Anet would have to change the entire GW skin for this...32 people in your party window? trying to scroll down every second to spam heal? Not likely. And like the above person stated, it would be complete chaos, there is no way you could lead 32 people...Especially random people. It's hard enough to get an 8 man group to form a strat.
ComMan
Why does everyone want Guild Wars to have EVERYTHING WoW has?
Zeru
GW pvp is different...as in, strategy based, not mob based or grind based. gw doesn't have to have what other games have, and while pvp needs more, this isn't the way to do it.
Ancalagon06
Actually, I want GW PvP to have everything that Battlefield 2 has.
I'm kidding. This didn't occur to me because of WoW, or BF2, though those are examples of how it might be done.
It wouldn't be hard to do, really. BF2 uses the squad system, where a team of 32 are (voluntarily) broken down into squads of 6, each with a leader. GW could implement something similar with ease. People who claim this would be pure chaos are right, it would be. If it was done like normal PvP. I'm thinking this would be an option for Guilds. While in a guild hall, you could form 4 parties of 8, set up like you want (or even more, smaller, parties, if you'd like). Then the guild leader (or officer) could initiate a Guild War, as opposed to a Guild Battle. Then ALL the teams in the guild hall would be taken into battle, not just the one team.
Or perhaps it could be pulled off with regular PvP. Other games have done it, it's possible to do it with GW. And I'm not just talking about WoW. :-P
EDIT: The Wars would force people to start developing strategies. Lord knows if Guild Battles and the Tombs can't force them to realize this, certainly this would. Because, if not this, then nothing else possibly could. Honestly, if massive matches of counterstrike, or battlefield, or any other FPS can easily be coordinated, then why can't GW? I know it's not entirely fair to compare GW to CS, but can't never could do anything.
I'm kidding. This didn't occur to me because of WoW, or BF2, though those are examples of how it might be done.
It wouldn't be hard to do, really. BF2 uses the squad system, where a team of 32 are (voluntarily) broken down into squads of 6, each with a leader. GW could implement something similar with ease. People who claim this would be pure chaos are right, it would be. If it was done like normal PvP. I'm thinking this would be an option for Guilds. While in a guild hall, you could form 4 parties of 8, set up like you want (or even more, smaller, parties, if you'd like). Then the guild leader (or officer) could initiate a Guild War, as opposed to a Guild Battle. Then ALL the teams in the guild hall would be taken into battle, not just the one team.
Or perhaps it could be pulled off with regular PvP. Other games have done it, it's possible to do it with GW. And I'm not just talking about WoW. :-P
EDIT: The Wars would force people to start developing strategies. Lord knows if Guild Battles and the Tombs can't force them to realize this, certainly this would. Because, if not this, then nothing else possibly could. Honestly, if massive matches of counterstrike, or battlefield, or any other FPS can easily be coordinated, then why can't GW? I know it's not entirely fair to compare GW to CS, but can't never could do anything.
King of Fools
i like this idea http://vnboards.ign.com/Guild_Wars_C...2/88022447/?12
Ancalagon06
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by King of Fools
i like this idea http://vnboards.ign.com/Guild_Wars_C...2/88022447/?12
|
edit: my bad, it actually does. An interesting idea. I think this idea, though, would be a little better, because the ability to attack another guild, regardless of anyone actually being there, can backfire badly.
DrSLUGFly
If I want magic does that mean I want GW to have something WoW has? I've never even played WoW... a 32 man team would be damn cool. Sure it would be chaos, but make the map big. It wouldn't be total chaos since real people fight in the hundreds all the time, sometimes in the thousands (if we count separate battles, millions)...
If you have a guild of 50 or 100 people, how hard is it going to be to organize a team of 32? It won't be hard at all.
To YTrill! the spam heal wouldn't come into effect. The 6 man team is your "party" and the other teams are your allies. This could be done, I don't see in any possible way how it could be a bad thing. Once implemented those who choose not to do it, don't do it.
We could also solve this by allowing shared instances...
If you have a guild of 50 or 100 people, how hard is it going to be to organize a team of 32? It won't be hard at all.
To YTrill! the spam heal wouldn't come into effect. The 6 man team is your "party" and the other teams are your allies. This could be done, I don't see in any possible way how it could be a bad thing. Once implemented those who choose not to do it, don't do it.
We could also solve this by allowing shared instances...
EmperorTippy
This would be great. But make it so that both sides have to be a guild or at most 2 guilds per side so that it isnt like a PUG were half the people dont know how to call targets.
DrSLUGFly
I agree, this should be accessable through guild hall only, with a possibility for allied guilds (that would be cool) and/or invited non-guild members (there must be -if not already- an invite option for guild halls)
Perhaps this could be something we would hope to see in Cantha. Maybe one of the end game missions in Cantha could involve a team of 32 attacking the "boss team" or something similar... rock on!!! I'm not even through the game storyline yet but I can't wait to get to Cantha.
Perhaps this could be something we would hope to see in Cantha. Maybe one of the end game missions in Cantha could involve a team of 32 attacking the "boss team" or something similar... rock on!!! I'm not even through the game storyline yet but I can't wait to get to Cantha.
theclam
Just because WoW has it, doesn't make it automatically bad. This is a good idea.
One upside and downside of this is that we'd have a large range of PvP modes, from 4v4 to 32v32. It's hard to balance that out. Necros (soul reaping and always available corpses) and AoE be disproportionately strong in 32v32. Heal Area might actually become uber.
Also, one way of managing 32 person teams would be to take WoW's way of managing raids. In a 45 person raid, there are 9 parties of 5 people each. In addition to party chat, there is raid chat, which lets you talk to everyone in your raid group. You only see the healthbars of your immediate party members. Guild Wars could use a similiar system, breaking down a 32 person team into 4 teams of 8.
One upside and downside of this is that we'd have a large range of PvP modes, from 4v4 to 32v32. It's hard to balance that out. Necros (soul reaping and always available corpses) and AoE be disproportionately strong in 32v32. Heal Area might actually become uber.
Also, one way of managing 32 person teams would be to take WoW's way of managing raids. In a 45 person raid, there are 9 parties of 5 people each. In addition to party chat, there is raid chat, which lets you talk to everyone in your raid group. You only see the healthbars of your immediate party members. Guild Wars could use a similiar system, breaking down a 32 person team into 4 teams of 8.
Red Locust
ahaha, my monk would have a heart attack if he saw 32 life bars moving up and down. Oh and heal party would be waaay overpowered, as would a number of other skills. This game is balanced for groups of 8, anything else and we'd start to see overpowered skills.
EmperorTippy
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Red Locust
ahaha, my monk would have a heart attack if he saw 32 life bars moving up and down. Oh and heal party would be waaay overpowered, as would a number of other skills. This game is balanced for groups of 8, anything else and we'd start to see overpowered skills.
|
sysfailur
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Padre
The reason there are only 8-person teams in PvP is that any higher and real strategy breaks down. Try to coordinate a 32 man team.... and you'll get nothing but chaos as soon as you run into the other team.
it would be interesting to watch, i suppose, but not all that fun to play. |
We often had groups of 50-100 and coordinated all in one vent channel.
Now, RANDOM pvp would be much different. You'd have to be organized or most likely you'd get destroyed.
32 is nothing. Make it 64 vs 64.
Storm Shadow
as somebody who really likes planetside i would really enjoy seeing battles like that in GW.
Crimson Eyes
heres a suggestion
how about making more team colours available for just the WARS
you would have SUB TEAMS (teams within a team)
these will be: red, blue, cyan and yellow (primary colours + cyan)
aka Team A
the other team will consist of black, white, green and purple
aka Team B
where each of these SUB TEAMS teams wil have a leader and they will all have to work together to fight the opposing teams
it will work like this in the arena;
two subteams from a team will start off next to each other,
and on their opposite side will be two subteams from the opposite team
e.g. sub teams red + yellow start next to each other and opposite them on other side of arena will be sub teams black and white
these 4 subteams will battle it out on their Half of the arena while the other subteams battle it out on the other half.
and subteams can come accross and help their fellow subteams at any time.
last team remaining wins.
it will be similar to tombs but with teams.
OK but heres my twist on my own idea.
same thing, everyone starts with two subteams and these two teams are in automatic alliance
the war begins, you hav to work together with ur allied team and defeat the opposing allied teams which you will meet first (design arena to suit this method)
while this is taking place, the other 2 sets of teams are battling on the other side, you cannot enter their half of the arena until both battles on either side come to a conclusion
(this could be a variable tho , work in progress
)
and then, ok heres the twist;
once the battles on either sides have been settled, the gates in the middle of the arena open allowing the teams to fight each other but once the gates open, all alliances are broken and its a 4 way fight, you and the team u began an alliance with is now your enemy as is the remaining teams.
to avoid there being a stand off, there will be a 5 minute or so time limit,
victory conditions are as follows
the last remaining TEAMS score = (average health after gates opened in %) x damage dealt/10
e.g. Red team: average health of 70% x damage of 5000 /10 = 70 x 500 = 3500
Blue team: average health of 80% x damage of 4000/10 = 3200
therefore in this case, the RED team will win
and using this formula u determine who wins after 5 minutes. (maybe 10)
but i put in 5 mins to further encourage battle and to make stand offs less desirable.
how about making more team colours available for just the WARS
you would have SUB TEAMS (teams within a team)
these will be: red, blue, cyan and yellow (primary colours + cyan)
aka Team A
the other team will consist of black, white, green and purple
aka Team B
where each of these SUB TEAMS teams wil have a leader and they will all have to work together to fight the opposing teams
it will work like this in the arena;
two subteams from a team will start off next to each other,
and on their opposite side will be two subteams from the opposite team
e.g. sub teams red + yellow start next to each other and opposite them on other side of arena will be sub teams black and white
these 4 subteams will battle it out on their Half of the arena while the other subteams battle it out on the other half.
and subteams can come accross and help their fellow subteams at any time.
last team remaining wins.
it will be similar to tombs but with teams.
OK but heres my twist on my own idea.
same thing, everyone starts with two subteams and these two teams are in automatic alliance
the war begins, you hav to work together with ur allied team and defeat the opposing allied teams which you will meet first (design arena to suit this method)
while this is taking place, the other 2 sets of teams are battling on the other side, you cannot enter their half of the arena until both battles on either side come to a conclusion
(this could be a variable tho , work in progress
)and then, ok heres the twist;
once the battles on either sides have been settled, the gates in the middle of the arena open allowing the teams to fight each other but once the gates open, all alliances are broken and its a 4 way fight, you and the team u began an alliance with is now your enemy as is the remaining teams.
to avoid there being a stand off, there will be a 5 minute or so time limit,
victory conditions are as follows
the last remaining TEAMS score = (average health after gates opened in %) x damage dealt/10
e.g. Red team: average health of 70% x damage of 5000 /10 = 70 x 500 = 3500
Blue team: average health of 80% x damage of 4000/10 = 3200
therefore in this case, the RED team will win
and using this formula u determine who wins after 5 minutes. (maybe 10)
but i put in 5 mins to further encourage battle and to make stand offs less desirable.
EmperorTippy
^^
I liked the other idea better as it kept this seperate from tombs and more stagey based than PUGs are right now.
I liked the other idea better as it kept this seperate from tombs and more stagey based than PUGs are right now.
Crimson Eyes
cheers tippy
unclepodger
All EXCELLENT ideas. I would REEEEALY like to see this.
Swarnt Brightstar
I've been wanting to have more than 1hundred players/team but major lag-fest...
I like the idea BUT there should be more than 32 players.... honestly 32v32.... heck make it like 64v64 or even 100v100 that would look so awesome... especially if you could get it so your chars marched and were able to look so pimp if they could charge type o thing...
Also, I think that 100v100 should be broken up into 10 groups o 10 or 20 groups of 5(Methinks I did that right)
Ya this is off topic but it'd be cool if you could make alliances on PvE for more players kinda like in FFXI(which I want really bad)
I like the idea BUT there should be more than 32 players.... honestly 32v32.... heck make it like 64v64 or even 100v100 that would look so awesome... especially if you could get it so your chars marched and were able to look so pimp if they could charge type o thing...
Also, I think that 100v100 should be broken up into 10 groups o 10 or 20 groups of 5(Methinks I did that right)
Ya this is off topic but it'd be cool if you could make alliances on PvE for more players kinda like in FFXI(which I want really bad)
funbun
Yeah, that's what I'm talking about. Open field to waring parties run at each other a clash.
Crimson Eyes
^^ maybe even include player of the war or sumthing, i.e. give the best player in the arena some recognition in terms of effectiveness, not sure how this would be implimented though. not sure what the formula would be. 
Aidan Gawain
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ytrill
will never ever happen...Anet would have to change the entire GW skin for this...32 people in your party window? trying to scroll down every second to spam heal? Not likely.
|
This divison would also help with the strategizing as each party could have a leader and the 4+ leaders could confer under a central commander (e.g. "Devona: Aidan, take your party south to ambush the enemies who are on their way to attack Mhenlo's party.").
Ancalagon06
Player of the War could be done fairly effectively like this, to use a healer as an example; the ammount of healing they did minus the amount of times the people they healed died. Healers with the highest score wins (this won't discriminate against smiting monks either, because if they don't heal, they won't fall into this category).
drowningfish999
Instead of having one large team, it could be something like a 4v4 teams of 8. That way its easier to heal since you only need to specifically watch your team, but its still a large scale battle. Their could be team chats and party chat, which speaks to your whole team and just your party of 8.
DrSLUGFly
they could also leave the team divisions up to us, asigning colors to the broken teams (or specific PvP capes) and have it all manageable from within the guild hall. That way if a guild trained with a team of 16 a team of 8 and two teams of 4, but another team trained with 4 teams of 8, and a third team has no clue and just goes in as one team, each would have different strategies but each would be able to design their own style.
King of Fools
last time this was suggested gaile said something about the tech not really being up to it. i think best they could do without lag is 16v16 until they get some more servers locations.
DrSLUGFly
16 vs 16 would be cool (until they get some more server locations )
)
goldfinger
I agree, 16 vs 16 would be pretty cool, and I am sure they are considering this as everyone would undoubtedly enjoy it...
I also think it has the opportunity of being a good gold sink, costing ac ertain amountof money each go
I also think it has the opportunity of being a good gold sink, costing ac ertain amountof money each go
Lt.Crumpet
THIS WOULD BE SO FRIKIN AWSOME!!!! even 32v32 would totaly rock! but yes breaking it down like bf2 (which i am totaly addicted to) into squads would be the only way to do it. and also the chaos is the part that i like the best! with that chaos u can do the coolest things. can u imagine how much fun it would be to sneak around back of the enemy army and flanking them before they realize you hit em? THAT WOULD BE SO AWSOME!!!
speedtouch
32 vs 32, 64 vs 64? WAY to much people.My internet connection slows down ALOT when just 30 people are fighting and im using DSL.I can't imagine the lagg if all the teams in HoH fought in the center all at once.
Lief
Zerg battles dont interest me.
Eskimo Bob
Thing about that, focus firing would drop someone no matter how many monks the other team had. There would be so many warriors that they would block each other.
Imagine a team of 20 air elementalists and the rest monks. All of them cats Orb on one guy. Bam he is dead without even a chance to be healed.
Imagine a team of 20 air elementalists and the rest monks. All of them cats Orb on one guy. Bam he is dead without even a chance to be healed.
Ancalagon06
That's why in CS and in Battlefield everyone attacks the same guy, and kills them, and then moves onto the next one?
If you make maps huge, and the individual units spawn relatively far apart, the actual "EVERYONE TARGET THIS GUY" should be reduced to non existent, or make winning independent of killing all their men, or there's another dozen things to come up with.
If you make maps huge, and the individual units spawn relatively far apart, the actual "EVERYONE TARGET THIS GUY" should be reduced to non existent, or make winning independent of killing all their men, or there's another dozen things to come up with.
Aidan Gawain
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DrSLUGFly
they could also leave the team divisions up to us, asigning colors to the broken teams (or specific PvP capes) and have it all manageable from within the guild hall. That way if a guild trained with a team of 16 a team of 8 and two teams of 4, but another team trained with 4 teams of 8, and a third team has no clue and just goes in as one team, each would have different strategies but each would be able to design their own style.
|
Imagine a team of 32 energy storage El/Mo's with the following strategy:
4 El/Mo's - Take turns using Glyph of Lesser Energy -> Aegis (total cost=5 energy per 30 seconds) to keep a permanent Aegis on the team. While these skills are recharging, attack.
6 El/Mo's - Take turns using Martyr -> Purge Conditions (total cost=10 energy per 30 seconds) to remove all of the party's conditions every 5 seconds. While these skills are recharging, attack.
22 El/Mo's - Take turns using Glyph of Lesser Energy -> Heal Party (total cost=5 energy per 30 seconds) to heal the party for a total of up to 49pts per second. While Glyph is recharging, attack. If need be, cast additional Heal Party's for even more healing.
ADDED NOTE: To give you a perspective on this, this setup would be like an enchantment that said "While you maintain this enchantment, you gain health regeneration of 49, have a 50% chance to block attacks, and get your conditions purged every 5 seconds." except this would only cost half as much regen as a normal enchantment for everyone but the Martyrs (who would pay the normal maintainance cost). And no, Scourge Healing wouldn't help much, as hex removers could effectively counter it.
Also, if everyone used Heal Party enough to barely break even with regen, and the Martyrs used Glyph as often as possible, the party would have health regen of over 200pts per second.
Of course, if two such teams ever battled, it would be a race to see whose team was the first to have too many of its members fall asleep...
FINAL NOTE:
Even in general, since there are many skills that help your whole party but few (none?) that hurt your opponent's whole party, having huge parties would help defense a lot more than offense, greatly increasing the occurance of stalemates in which neither team can effectively harm the other. This would be exacerbated by the fact the the increased effectiveness of defense relative to offense would cause teams to have more protectors/healers and fewer damage-dealers (such as the entirely healing-centered team mentioned above).
Ancalagon06
that's why people have suggested that it be broken into teams of 8 that are just allied with each other (in other words, like the Ascalon Guards you run across from time to time). I understand what you are saying, and I think it's valid, but that doesn't mean there isn't a way around it, or that this shouldn't be done.