Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 69

Thread: Discussing crowd limiting

  1. #41

    Re: Progression

    Originally posted by spelk

    Limiting the people who can partake in the war based on your level (or amount of progression) is ludicrous.

    Let all levels defend and attack a tower. If player progression truly is a sign of dedication and commitment to playing in the AO world, then let it be a part of the combat mechanics. Level 200's will slaughter level 50's. These towers are designed to be very expensive, very sought after commodities. Then let the lower levels strive to become part of it, rather than restrict the whole battlefield to please a proportion of your players.
    Example : 2 lvl 50 teams are having a battle over a tower. I jump in with belamorte ( being a mp ). I heal the tower under attack.
    You can shoot what you want, but the healer and regen take A LOT of fight power to drop the hp's then.

    I think the battles should be lvl based. Kick out the high lvl's at lower lvl bases.
    Johndoo, can I have essence pls ?

  2. #42

    Re: Progression

    Originally posted by spelk

    War is brutal, chaotic and very rarely controlled by strict rules.

    Limiting the people who can partake in the war, at the numbers level is justified on a game performance level - too many people and the players will be lagged out so that the battle is no longer possible.

    Limiting the people who can partake in the war based on your level (or amount of progression) is ludicrous.

    But, you are missing the point that the whole game is based around progression.
    Hmmm, Spelk..I like many of your ideas. However, it is important to remember that the sole purpose of any popular game is for providing fun. No one expects R-K to simulate a true planet at war. War sucks, in RL. Lag also sucks. I believe that is why you are willing to admit that having a limit on the number of players in some areas may be a good thing. Being in an area where you can't move or act due to 'lag' is not fun.

    So, the question is, how can the potential for lag be reduced and the fun increased. Maybe they are mutually exclusive goals. But, we can try to come up with a way to help lag that might not decrease the fun much.

    You don't offer a solution to lag, but you do appear to be arguing for relaxed PvP brackets. I don't see how that helps lag. In fact, it only guarantees that more people will be interested in showing up at any particular battle and wanting to stay. So, I say your suggestions would increase lag, therefore making the game less fun.

    Also, I completely disagree with your repeated proposition that 'progression' is THE name of the game on R-K. Sure, progression is fun. But, it is also fun being level 5. And it is fun being level 10. It it wasn't fun being those levels, few people would make it to level 50 or higher. (Is it fun yet at level 50, Spelk?)

    So, any suggestion that is made that proclaims that it is good 'because higher levels will benefit, and everyone should strive to become a higher level' is forgetting about the fun factor for ALL levels. Therefore, it is less about overall fun, and more about a hunger for power. Therefore, I reject those suggestions.

    So, what about making it more FUN for higher levels? I'm ALL FOR IT! Let's assume there is a crowded battle over a level 150 Tower. When FC is 'calculating' who to throw out of this overcrowed area, I think they should throw out the level 5s, and 10s and 20s first! Or, Spelk, would you prefer that they randomly throw people out? Maybe throw out a few 150 levels?

    What if you are level 150, Spelk, and you want to join this battle? Wouldn't you be dissappointed that you couldn't join the battle because 20 level tens wanted to hang out and gawk?

    The reverse would be true for higher levels hanging out at a level 10 base. The only difference is that the higher levels sometimes can buff the lower levels (if they have any NCU available, that is). How is it more FUN to allow a bunch of level 150 players to hang out near a level 10 tower while level 10s are denied access?

    Who loses by choosing who to boot based on level? I see everyone winning, except those that just like to hang out and clog up battlefields.

    This isn't about fairness, it is about FUN!

  3. #43

    reading the threads below

    it seems that the cc system is indeed not discriminating when people flood a zone.

    apparently the cap and max numbers did not work period.

    does not bode well.
    sept 03 - the day ao was keeled by sl.

    gone now. byebye.

  4. #44
    Sorry, I didn't read through much of this thread, so I don't know if this suggestion has been brought up.

    Make the Controller teamable. Requirement would be at least 1 org member in team(org member must do the invite as well). Yes, the Defenders would lose 1 spot in Allied teams.........but would gain crowd-control protection(anyone teamed with Controller is non-warpable). This would ALSO allow for higher-levels to defend their low level bases instead of standing around helplessly while some lvl50ish team destroys their org's lvl75 base.

    As I've said before, balance should *always* favor the defenders. Attacking someone's towers is a serious matter, and you should be prepared to face the consequences if you do.
    Nealandbob Headbasher Burninsword-RK1
    Deathfyst Tonofbricks -RK2
    Tonofbricks Nealandbob -RK Test embracing my inner Brat
    Finally back from Iraq
    Enforcers ONLY vote here!
    WoW-Pahani, Skywall/Horde and Barthilas/Horde
    "A good Enforcer dies a lot"-Deng
    "FC didn't create Enforcers, Deng did" -Tza

  5. #45
    I think people are forgetting that some players dont play constantly, but still want to play around with towers. So there are level 20 towers around.
    Think of those as if they are in another dimension, high levels shouldnt really be involved, past giving them buffs outside the area, and wishing them good luck.

    Now for high level towers, sure don't bother level limitting, if a low level is there, let em get toasted, they shouldn't be there anyway.

    But for low level towers, it should just be low levels versus low levels. The big problem with low level towers that I see, you can see by going into the subway right now. Lots of level 24 twinks, some even with CAS armor, or have levelled up past 24 and just never leave. So low level definiately does not mean newbie, especially when you put a tangable reward out there, the casual player really doesn't have much of a chance.

    But at least know what FC is trying to accomplish, something fun and fair for all levels to participate in. QL50 tower means you high levels have to play somewhere else, QL150+ tower means low levels shouldn't be there either.

    Bottom line is people have to remember the newbies, if all you can do in a situation is... get killed by a level 200, there's no point in even getting Notum wars. And maybe they don't WANT to power level to level 150 before they are allowed to participate in tower battles.

    I agree with just warp out people not in level range first, that should cut out a whole lot before having to start warping people that should be there.

  6. #46

    Smile Middle Ground

    How should combat be reflected in the PvP combat that is the Notum Wars (isn't it great to be talking about this /me smiles).

    Let's start with what we know.

    1. Levels in the game matter. They represent the characters expertise, achievement and skill etc.. (ok, we all know that).

    2. Balancing Fun and Realism is cool and vital to the game (everyone can agree I am sure)

    3. There are some technical limitations to what can be done.

    Ok here are the variables involved

    A. Number of people
    B. Level mix
    C. Attack vs Defend mix
    D. Level of the tower
    E. Level of player vs tower mix

    I think that's it, now what are the "rules of engagment".
    Here are some thoughts of the top of my head.

    1. A battle area is established at initation of attack.
    2. That battle area is self contained with no outside influence.
    3. That battle area is assigned a level based on the tower level(e.g. 20,50,100,200).
    4. Level of character must be less then base +10 (i.e. up to lvl 30 gets in a lvl 20 battle) to enter battle. Sorry high levels, but you don't think these battles are worth your time. Excluded characters may pass through if the limit is not yet met, but may not participate in any way.
    5. Lower level character may enter any battle, but if the limit is met they are the first to get warped. If I am a general and I know I have a limit, this is who I would kick out, any objections?
    6. Once in a battle area, no PvP limits apply.
    7. Attackers are defined by an attack against a tower or battle with a directly associated clan member. Until they do that, they are defenders and are not attacked by towers.

    Ok sounds complex, but easy to implement and all a player has to think about is.

    Is my level to high (y/n)?
    Should I attack or defend (a/d)?

    Thats it simple and easy.

    Thouhgts.
    -Jhason (newbie wannabe)

  7. #47
    Originally posted by Cz
    ...everything can be changed. It's 'just' a matter of resources. ....
    Get the dev team to make the game more robust/efficient (instead of putting straw hats into game) so that you do not need to implement something of this nature. It is very contradictory of what MMORPGs are meant to be. Not to mention the potential problems a system like this will in-fact cause. Picture this:

    QL 250 control tower owned by omni heavily fortified with over 100 QL 250 turrets and towers. You actually expect a team of 40 clanners to make it to the controller and destroy it with 40 omni peeps defending? Not gonna happen. Even if it were 60 to 20 in favor of the clanners, the towers at that QL are strong enough to withstand a very heavy beating and any interference in the process of downing the controller too easily eliminates any chance of success.

    The only way that crowd control could be implemented without breaking the concept of attacking a tower with any chance of success is to provide a way (not an easy way, just a way) for someone skilled enough to somehow make towers easier to take down. For instance:

    There needs to be a way to "malfunction" a control tower, say with a hacking device in a process that takes about 30 seconds. The process should require BE & EE. If successful, the reflect, regen, and all effects of the tower cease making it much easier to destroy.

    At the same time, there also needs to be a way to "repair" a control tower. The process should require a screwdriver and skill in EE and FT. Repairing the tower should take 1 minute. Once repaired, reflect, regen, and all benefits of the tower re-commence.

    Maybe with that implemented, crowd control can be put into the game without making it impossible for an attacking team to take a base down. Still though, I really don't see the fun in being part of a 100 person attack squad and then having to wait in line with 60 other people while the first 40 to make it into the zone are blastin away....
    .: Naraya :.

  8. #48
    Originally posted by Cz
    [Any thoughts on that? Note that none of the suggested solution have been discussed with coders or designers yet. [/B]
    Crowd control is not a workable solution to the lag issue no matter how you try and slice it. If more attackers show up than defenders the attackers should have the advantage .. not be warped out of the battle. If a base has more defenders they should have the advantage.

    What was once the fun of massive battles has been reduced to being bounced all over the game.


    What I am saying is that no matter how you implement it .. putting restrictions on where people can be in game will ruin more people enjoyment of the game than lag would.
    Rolled
    Coathanger
    RHD Black Watch Regiment

    Remember how fun the first week of NW was?

    CC is teh devil!

  9. #49
    The absolute best thing you can do with all the code pertaining to crowd control/crowd limiting/etc: DELETE IT!

    I love flying halfway across two zones to get to a base defense, only to be teleported across the zone repeatedly. I really do. It makes me wet. Gives me shivers down my spine even...

    DELETE IT!
    .: Naraya :.

  10. #50
    try this on for size

    being an engie i let my bot do most of the fighting
    and a lev 200 slayer does massive damage to towers,
    my litte 100 point hits are nothing to his 800-1000 hits

    so guess what happens, i get warped all over the place cos when i stop to buff the bot , i'm registerd as non-attacking

    smarten up guys, the bot is dealing the damage for me, i have a right to be in that battle and not be warped away

  11. #51
    CC is NOT working as intended and I can't find words for how upset I am.

    There is a pretty hmm cheesy tactic that can be used to bypass the system...

    It happened to us today, but I'm not saying that it doesn't happen to the other side as well.
    If all the attackers log out at the base they want to attack - the defenders can't get in. Simple but effective .
    I'm NOT saying that only the Clans use this tactic, but I *am* saying that the system is FUBAR.

    Most of my guild was stuck in crash loop today or got warped back when trying to get to the battle-field.
    Someone who managed to get in, flew over the area and counted omni- versus clan.
    There was around 60-70 (or more) Clanners in the Zone and only 10-20 Omnis... and none of the defenders (all from the defending Omni-guild) could get in...

    After we've defended this base for about 5 days in a row and lost it to the not working CC-System today, I'm royally teed off.
    After one hour I'm still stuck in a crash-loop in the grid, whilst the Clans beat on our Base.

  12. #52
    CC is just not working.

    Please get rid of it.
    Rolled
    Coathanger
    RHD Black Watch Regiment

    Remember how fun the first week of NW was?

    CC is teh devil!

  13. #53

    Need a major makeover

    Ppl get warped to the strangest places, stuck and lost

    Can't run a war this way???

    "There is only one thing more painful than learning from experience and that is not learning from experience." (Archibald McLeish)
    Best regards Juliet Poetica Capulet (female solitus trader lvl195 - poet by heart, Oh Romeo, - who need Romeo?) Applicant of Ancarim Iron Legion

    "What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well." (Antoine de Saint-Exupéry)
    "Not all who wander are lost." (John Ronald Reuel Tolkien)
    "To Dare is to risk losing your foothold for a moment, Not to Dare is to risk losing yourself." (Søren Kierkegaard)

    Anaïs Manifestos Nin (female solitus mp lvl 171) Member of Ancarim Iron Legion
    Angel Heroess Heart (female solitus fixer lvl 102) Applicant of Ancarim Iron Legion
    Luna YangYing Lee (female solitus MA lvl 75) Unit Commander of Legionaries
    Meow Wyxxen Meow (female solitus doc lvl 74) Applicant of Legionaries
    Destiny ZorZereZ Decay (female nanomage nt lvl 57) Applicant of Legionaries
    Kittie DarkGodess Catt (female solitus soldier lvl 39) Applicant of Legionaries
    Modesty PlayGirl Blaise (female solitus engie lvl 19) Member of Legionaries

  14. #54

    Thumbs down Hate it

    My vote goes to getting rid of it.

  15. #55
    Originally posted by Naraya


    Get the dev team to make the game more robust/efficient (instead of putting straw hats into game) so that you do not need to implement something of this nature.
    Different dev teams. I'd hate to see a straw hat created by a network programmer. Same way I'd hate to play a game whose network code was written by 3dsmax/Maya graphic designers

    Originally posted by Naraya

    It is very contradictory of what MMORPGs are meant to be. Not to mention the potential problems a system like this will in-fact cause. Picture this:

    QL 250 control tower owned by omni heavily fortified with over 100 QL 250 turrets and towers. You actually expect a team of 40 clanners to make it to the controller and destroy it with 40 omni peeps defending? Not gonna happen. Even if it were 60 to 20 in favor of the clanners, the towers at that QL are strong enough to withstand a very heavy beating and any interference in the process of downing the controller too easily eliminates any chance of success.

    The only way that crowd control could be implemented without breaking the concept of attacking a tower with any chance of success is to provide a way (not an easy way, just a way) for someone skilled enough to somehow make towers easier to take down. For instance:

    There needs to be a way to "malfunction" a control tower, say with a hacking device in a process that takes about 30 seconds. The process should require BE & EE. If successful, the reflect, regen, and all effects of the tower cease making it much easier to destroy.

    At the same time, there also needs to be a way to "repair" a control tower. The process should require a screwdriver and skill in EE and FT. Repairing the tower should take 1 minute. Once repaired, reflect, regen, and all benefits of the tower re-commence.

    Maybe with that implemented, crowd control can be put into the game without making it impossible for an attacking team to take a base down. Still though, I really don't see the fun in being part of a 100 person attack squad and then having to wait in line with 60 other people while the first 40 to make it into the zone are blastin away....
    Your suggestion for malfunctions and stuff are things I hope Funcom will expand into with towers. Engineers repair damaged controllers and turrens. Traders upgrading (not replacing) and customizing turrets and guardians. Agents and Fixers being able to sabotage (though obviously in different ways) towers. The foundation is here: the land control towers. Funcom just has to build on them.

    Problem is, that doesn't address Crowd Control at all. People are saying "Dump CC". Problem is I doubt it can be simply 'dumped'. After all it was implemented to address a problem: too many people in one area overloads something (be it the server or the client, cause both seem to happen). Simply removing CC leaves the base problem: too many people overloads something. And that's something I haven't seen anyone come up with a suggestion for yet.

    Based on guesses of how things work, there are probably a number of places where FC can optimize the game and possibly reduce or eliminate the need for Crowd Control. Using shading techniques instead of a texture for everything to reduce object rendering on the client side. Better (or smarter) communications between the clients and the server, to reduce overhead. Problem is, all those probably require rewrites of AO's core code and extensive modifications to the existing items ingame. That's not going to happen tomorrow (optimistically, it'll happen for AO2 ).

    Till then, I think we're going to have to settle for Crowd Control. THe system isn't anywhere near perfect but I'm certain the programmers know that (we've complained loud enough). So CC will get tweaked and tweaked some more, with screwups happening that lead to humorous moments (an Omni getting CC'ed into the middle of a Sentinel's meeting would be funny).

    But realistically, what do you expect to happen? We know large groups of players can crush smaller systems like fleas with people just standing around. Just ignore that fact and go into slideshow mode during a battle?
    History admires the wise, but it elevates the brave. - Edmund Morris

    The first faults are theirs that commit them, the second theirs that permit them. - Unknown

    Did you ever get the feeling that the world had an abundance of idiots? And that God had arranged for you to meet every single one of them before you died? - Kuroshio

  16. #56
    Originally posted by Kuroshio

    Just ignore that fact and go into slideshow mode during a battle?
    The interesting thing is I haven't had these problems (lag). I do however get bounced around quite regularily.

    People need to turn everything possible graphics wise off. Lower the settings to minimum. Then lets see how much lag they have.

    When the servers drop out of sync and the zone crashes that is a server problem. Time to take a little of that NW money and upgrade the servers.
    Rolled
    Coathanger
    RHD Black Watch Regiment

    Remember how fun the first week of NW was?

    CC is teh devil!

  17. #57
    Originally posted by Rolller


    The interesting thing is I haven't had these problems (lag). I do however get bounced around quite regularily.

    People need to turn everything possible graphics wise off. Lower the settings to minimum. Then lets see how much lag they have.

    When the servers drop out of sync and the zone crashes that is a server problem. Time to take a little of that NW money and upgrade the servers.
    Rolller, I rarely get problems on my system too (other than the initial stutter when encountering large groups). But people don't have my system.

    AMD 1.2 ghz with 1.5gigs rams. Geforce 4 MX 460 64mb Ram. My system automatically runs an industrial strength defrag every night continuously until I wake up in the morning so my resource database for AO is completely defragged and contiguous. AO sits on a 120 gig 7500 rpm hard drive that's 50% empty.

    But most people don't have my system nor keep their systems the way I do mine
    History admires the wise, but it elevates the brave. - Edmund Morris

    The first faults are theirs that commit them, the second theirs that permit them. - Unknown

    Did you ever get the feeling that the world had an abundance of idiots? And that God had arranged for you to meet every single one of them before you died? - Kuroshio

  18. #58

    CC BAH !!

    Get this **** of the server !! It doesnt work and its gay as hell!! Im tired of dying cause i cant run into or out of a ****ing zone that is full of ppl simply because im getting warped back to my previous possition. Get this crap off the game.

  19. #59
    Ok...here's a more direct address to Crowd Control....

    There is no fix for Crowd Control. The concept is unbecoming of a massive multiplayer online role playing game. Why does Crowd Control break the game?

    #1. Lag. The intermingling of player repositioning and lag is causing a wide variety of problems. Not to mention the level of frustration that one has to endure when they've spent the time to get there and buff up only to be teleported to some care-bear gas area because of crowd control. It sucks more than being blackdoored in a mission to be honest...

    #2. The "40-man org" syndrome. The only time that the size of your org really matters now is in that of determining the largest possible size of your base. It no longer matters if you have a big org or a small org when it comes down to the nitty gritty (attacking / defending). With Crowd Control, your org is 40 members big (or whatever they set the limit at). Crowd Control is actually a stealth big org nerf. Little orgs don't feel this nerf because their entire org fits within the limits of this lame thing known as Crowd Control.

    #3. Exploitation. With as much internal game lag as there is, any code you put in to defeat exploitation will fail. The game needs to be made more robust/efficient in terms of resource usage....

    You (FunCom) know exactly what the core of the problem is...you have to, otherwise you'd have no reason for implementing Crowd Control in the first place. When Gaute addressed the community on this issue, his apologetic tone suggested that the dev team was in-fact giving up on the task of fixing the lag/sync and instead decided to bubble gum and duct tape it with something so very contradictory of all that is a massive multiplayer online role playing game. Crowd Control can never work and the massive swarm of cancellations that will happen should choose to enable Crowd Control throughout all of the playfields can only be avoided by eliminating it.

    All I know is...I'm tired of being relocated out of the battle area...doesn't matter what the reason is (unless I die of course).

    Got coffee?
    .: Naraya :.

  20. #60

    Angry yalls crowd control sux!!

    pathetic! that sums up my experience so far w crowd control!its freakin pitiful!! no technical crap or bs. tried defendin a tower today so i can only tell u it was a joke people defending the tower r getting teleported to another place??wtf?? nice crowd control!! lol umm ok.... NEXT!!

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •