Things could still go well. If they're going to do this instance-based combat (which, in my previous thread, people were bashing me for bringing up...), they could still do a Heroes and General approach to it. Having a set amount of resources dedicated to a fight then allowing players to "opt in" and spend points to give more resources to the battle wouldn't be bad. The Orks could naturally have a larger pool to draw from, as a means to balance the fact that they won't have sheer numbers on their side.
Yes, but they DID say that "an ork boy is not going to be equivalant to a space marine". I remember them saying that. If the races are all the same it completely robs anything but aesthetics from the game.
It was more like a boy will not be able to outshoot a devastator but will be able to kick his @ss in mellee!
It won't be the equivalent because it will play differently, but it should have their own strenghts to be able to compete against them, and their streanghts won't be numbers because no faction will have a number limit...
Exactly. I remember Brent giving some examples a few Twitch casts ago. I think specifically related to the Eldar. Something like the Banshee would face roll a SM in melee provided it got close enough without the SM shooting it from afar. I think the balance will come from play style (loosely based on the lore) rather than a weapon vs weapon balancing. In short, the class/race combo will have advantages or disadvantages and you have to learn to play to your strengths. No different than other PVP MMOs I've played. Balancing the numbers of a specific race will be tricky. That's where alliances will come into play. I remember the same issue with Aion back in the day.
yes the istanced combat mean that the largest faction will full all the slot and must wait in a queue for wainting. mean also that all the other faction will fight against the largest faction for the majority of the time. imagine that: during peak time, large faction will full all the continental slot that can fill. after that go in queue waiting for another small faction to occupy all their continental slot and start a istanced match. this should avoid queue?? how? basically if you want to play you should do pve or wait that some eney is available, waiting where? in queue. that mean eldar never go in overflow and can fight in the continet, chaos will probally fight some overflow but finding instantly the match and space marine and ork will play largely only on overflow hoping that there is a sufficent number of ork f2p and that oke f2p don't stop to play because bored od play only on overflow and waiting for ours to play on the continent
The Heroes and Generals style of Risk+Battlefield is so bleh. They recently implemented 3 way battles, but due to how their system works, it's terrible. 2 attacking teams start on opposite ends of the map working toward the middle. Defending team just guards the central objectives. This almost always results in a victory for the defenders. I would hope not to see this system in EC. The biggest downside of H&G is there are literally only 7 battlefield maps. No matter where across Europe you are fighting, it all looks the same.
well i'm seeing all this doom and gloom right know in the threads about how every one will be stuck in ques or overflow maps, etc, but there forgetting there will be a lot of fight going on in different place, and lets say that can at launch at least get 64vs 64 teams per zone, so we have something like 120 unique zones to fight in so that would give each sever region about a cap .... 128 * 120 = 15360 total people , and lets just assume that only about mmmm half of the zones are available to fight over at any one time which brings the numbers per regional served down to 7680 players per regional server. Now if we compare that to planetside 2, at the moment, there are 4 continents, and if i remember right, have a cap of about 2000 each, so 4 * 2000 = 8000 player per one of there severs, and i don't know about you but its been a long long time since i'v had to wait in a que in planetside 2, heck even when it was the hype of launch the months that followed, i never had that long of a wait. So it seem's to me that all this doom and gloom about que times and overflow maps etc, seems to be mostly people jumping the gun, tho i do expect a hug hug surge of players at the very launch of game, but hey where were going to have that problem in the first place any way. know if were lucky, and pikko servers can support even more then the stander 64vs 64 battles, and say reach even 100 vs 100, and only about half of the zones/ locations can be in use at any one time, we would have a server pop cap of 12000, and that not including how overflow maps or "battle islands" would add to this. so i dont feel will have to much of a problem most people be stuck in a que or on a over flow map, there appears to be plenty of room for use to stuff players and fight.
we suppose that eternal crusade is a successfull game, not a desolate game like ps2: at release ps2 have suffered queue: there is a lot less player now in ps2. there is no pikko server.
