Let's make it the Battlefield of sword games! 16v16 and 32v32? All-out sword war?! | Forums

[Dez_troi_aR]

I just want to briefly say that i am sorry for beeing a little too salty in my third post on page 2, where quoted three of you guys.

There is no harm in thinking about alternative modes. I still stand behind everything i said in my argument with desperaterook, but if someone states that it would potentially be fun for him fighting 32v32 that doesnt make him comparable to 14year old me playing starcraft (20min no rush was fun, inddeed).

have a good day, i needed to clean my consience ;D

[Dez_troi_aR]

This thread is so awsome.

[xLeapingLizardx]

Sure is, keeps me coming back. Hey Dez, and anyone else reading this, if your testing the Beta could you please try and force some 1v4 situations and post video at the link below so we can break it down and assure some of these nervous types that it is possible or impossible to survive!

http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php...ference-Forums

It's not that we (well me) are nervous, its the fact that we don't want to have to withstand a whole bunch of outnumbered situations every game.....
I can see your side of this (wanting game modes with larger number of players) but like I've already said with the current mechanics I just don't believe it would work very well.
Now how about trying to see our different perspectives of it...

Anyways I am done discussing it with you because I feel like you are a bit too condescending about it....
I am not trying to offend you at all but you don't have to speak the way you do to people that disagree and give you solid reasons why they disagree with your ideas.

[xLeapingLizardx]

No no, let me apologize if I've offended you or anyone else, I'm very outspoken and have been told so throughout my life, so with all sincerity; I am sorry.

Now more to the point, this thread is titled "Let's make it the Battlefield of sword games 16v16 and 32v32 All-out Sword War" I'm totally for this which I why I bothered posting here. Problem is most people within the thread are against it and feel strongly in their views on the subject, which is fine, but surely there's a separate thread for the naysayers. I didn't think this was a Yay vs Nay thread hence my strong opposition to opinions that wouldn't feel the game could sustain its fun factor if it added larger maps and player modes. My sarcasm and brash comments are only meant to keep the topic hot, more views more comments more chances it gets noticed and taken seriously by the devs, that's it, no disrespect to anyone.

I appreciate and accept your apology (although I wasn't individually offended or anything).

I understand where you are coming from too. I think any thread is going to have strong opinions whether they are for or against the OP. I think it's enjoyable reading other perspectives and what not.
Also you could technically say this is a "Yay or nay" thread since it has a poll attached to it..
Anyways I would just suggest to try and keep everything to a polite and civil debate as much as possible.

[GewaltSam]

This game works in way smaller numbers. There may be a game at one point that does those large-scale battlefields filled with dozens engaged in hand-to-hand combat, and it may be a game that I'll hold very dearly. For Honor is something completely different, though. If I'd play Battlefield One, I wouldn't go to the forums and lead a serious argument like "Let's make this a 5on5 Arena Shooter!"

[Mjolnir1337]

This game works in way smaller numbers. There may be a game at one point that does those large-scale battlefields filled with dozens engaged in hand-to-hand combat, and it may be a game that I'll hold very dearly. For Honor is something completely different, though. If I'd play Battlefield One, I wouldn't go to the forums and lead a serious argument like "Let's make this a 5on5 Arena Shooter!"

I wouldnt say asking for more numbers is asking to change the Genre of game...


Point being, I think its a cool idea if they did larger scale battles. Frankly I would NOT like 100vs 100 or even 20 vs 20 would be too much. I could see an 8v8 or 6v6 or 5v5 match though. Or frankly a 10 vs 10 could be fun too. I think that the game is definitely made for smaller numbers. I DO think there are some great "anti-zerg" mechanics in this game, such as no major ranged attacks, no "walk through" aka player collision, and most of all, FF being active. So it has all the anti zerg mechanics in COMBAT.

I think you would need to spread out the maps more, for the sake of "lag" likely have less NPCs on the maps. or something, but i think it COULD be fun with larger numbers.


I would RATHER than master the current playlists of 1,2,4 party size than increase that.