Age of Conan

You know, I love the idea of 48vs48....though I hope that some day we see battles upwards of 200vs200(that would be awesome), but in games like BF2 and such 64vs64 is just about right for some great battles to occur.   Now what would really make me (edited for the graphic nature) would be to see large scalle battles like the kind you see in Planetside...but done with swords, bows and siege machines.  

That would be incredibly awesome! 

---

Originally posted by Teala
You know, I love the idea of 48vs48....though I hope that some day we see battles upwards of 200vs200(that would be awesome), but in games like BF2 and such 64vs64 is just about right for some great battles to occur.   Now what would really make me (edited for the graphic nature) would be to see large scalle battles like the kind you see in Planetside...but done with swords, bows and siege machines.  
That would be incredibly awesome! 

---

That did actually make me laugh, and it is quite true. But I do find that 48 vs. 48 is going to be good and if they find that it isn't or people are crying out for more then I bet they will increase it. Also the way we are arguing is that 48 seems like a low number, but once you get into the game you could find that 48 is the perfect number and if it went any higher it would ruin it. But this is just opinion and we will have to wait to see if siege warfare is good with 48 players or not.

I think wow has contaminated people's minds if "we want to see x vs x". Everything set up, there's no surprise factor, there's no adrenaline, NO POLITICS...its just...routine. Way to paste pvp in a game making it totally useless. PvP without consequences is just as bad as set up "fair" pvp, nobody gets pissed, nobody cares about dying, people get that "this pvp thing has no sense" feeling and everybody gets bored.

Im sad to see im one of the few ones here who would pray for a decent pvp system, and not these mini games that never made pvp matter.

Originally posted by unsane13

conversation between funcom developers and AoC fanbois

AoC Fanbois: hey, we are here for the epic siege battles you told us about with hundreds of players

funcom developers: (waves hand and uses jedi mind trick) these aren't the siege battles you are looking for

AoC Fanbois: these aren't the siege battles we are looking for

funcom developers: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

AoC Fanbois: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

funcom developers: move along

AoC fanbois: move along. Man I am totally stoaked about the awesome 48 vs. 48 siege battles we were promised.

 

... and we have a clear winner of this thread!

Originally posted by markoraos

 

Originally posted by unsane13

conversation between funcom developers and AoC fanbois

AoC Fanbois: hey, we are here for the epic siege battles you told us about with hundreds of players

funcom developers: (waves hand and uses jedi mind trick) these aren't the siege battles you are looking for

AoC Fanbois: these aren't the siege battles we are looking for

funcom developers: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

AoC Fanbois: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

funcom developers: move along

AoC fanbois: move along. Man I am totally stoaked about the awesome 48 vs. 48 siege battles we were promised.

 

 

... and we have a clear winner of this thread!

This made me laugh as well.  I have to say, that is the sentiment I got regarding how the tone of the posts went over the last 3 days or so.

With only 9 keeps, and 96 people per battle. Most people won't even get to participate in sieges.

And forget about mercenaries. They certainly won't be needed

Originally posted by unsane13

conversation between funcom developers and AoC fanbois

AoC Fanbois: hey, we are here for the epic siege battles you told us about with hundreds of players

funcom developers: (waves hand and uses jedi mind trick) these aren't the siege battles you are looking for

AoC Fanbois: these aren't the siege battles we are looking for

funcom developers: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

AoC Fanbois: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

funcom developers: move along

AoC fanbois: move along. Man I am totally stoaked about the awesome 48 vs. 48 siege battles we were promised.

 

In Norway I guess "hundreds" = 96.

In Jason Stones head "up to" 500 in a siege = 96.

Apparently massive, huge and epic also = 96

Hell Funcom says it still is being "tweaked" well you know what tweaked means? That also means that the number could go DOWN not just up.

Originally posted by unsane13

conversation between funcom developers and AoC fanbois

AoC Fanbois: hey, we are here for the epic siege battles you told us about with hundreds of players

funcom developers: (waves hand and uses jedi mind trick) these aren't the siege battles you are looking for

AoC Fanbois: these aren't the siege battles we are looking for

funcom developers: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

AoC Fanbois: these siege battles will only be 48 vs. 48

funcom developers: move along

AoC fanbois: move along. Man I am totally stoaked about the awesome 48 vs. 48 siege battles we were promised.

 

haha, pure genius